Removing Hoopl dependency?

Alan & Kim Zimmerman alan.zimm at gmail.com
Fri Jun 9 09:26:16 UTC 2017


But equally, stackage is a major part of the haskell ecosystem.

As such, implications and paths forward need to be considered.

Alan

On 9 June 2017 at 11:16, Herbert Valerio Riedel <hvriedel at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Simon,
>
> On 2017-06-09 at 09:50:51 +0200, Simon Peyton Jones via ghc-devs wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> >> Stackage only allows one version of each package
> >
> > I didn’t know that, but I can see it makes sense.  That makes a strong
> > case for re-doing it as a new package hoopl2
>
> The limitations of Stackage's design shouldn't drive nor limit
> library design. Cabal has been moving to finally allow us to have
> multiple versions and even multiple configurations/instances of the same
> version of a package registered in the package db at the same time, and
> subjecting ourselves to Stackage's limitations after all the work done
> (and more in that direction is being considered to push the boundaries
> even further) to that effect *now* seems quite backward to me.
>
> If we push the idea to its conclusion, that we shall rather publish a
> new package rather than release a new major version of a package to
> workaround Stackage, you'd see a proliferation of number-suffixed
> packages on Hackage.  Moreover, packages which can easily support
> multiple major versions of a package would have to use conditional logic
> boilerplate in their .cabal files (which again would be incompatible
> with Stackage's inherent limitations, as it allows only *one
> configuration* of a given package version).
>
> We should build upon the facilities we already have in place; and major
> versions are here to encode the epoch/generation of an API; moreover, as
> a big advantage over classic SemVer, we also have this 2-component major
> version which gives us more flexibility for versioning during developing
> two or more epochs of an API in parallel. So hoopl-1.* and hoopl-2.*
> could keep evolving independently, each branch being able to perform
> major version increments in their respective version namespace.
>
> Cheers,
>   HVR
> _______________________________________________
> ghc-devs mailing list
> ghc-devs at haskell.org
> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-devs/attachments/20170609/dbf1c943/attachment.html>


More information about the ghc-devs mailing list