[Haskell-cafe] Hackage and GHC 6.8

[Neil Davies]

Thinking on it more - surely there is enough information from the
failed compilations to suggest changes to the cabal files? Feed them
back to the developers?

My thoughts go this way - people like creating, that's why hackage is
beginning to grow. They don't tend to like the packaging issues - they
are seen as a distraction the more we can automate this the better,
the more quickly the libraries are going to get up to date.

As a community we are building a momentum here - let's not derail it
by a lack of attention to detail.

Neil

On 09/09/2007, Neil Davies <semanticphilosopher at googlemail.com> wrote:
> Ah,
>
> this begins to answer my question: there isn't really a plan....
>
> I would have thought that he first step is to be able to distinguish
> which of the hackage packages "compile" under 6.8 - some annotation to
> the hackage DB? Secondly, is there a dependency graph of the stuff on
> hackage anywhere? That would identify which order to change packages
> in (for example the cabal-install package is dependent on exactly one
> version of the HTTP library). We need to size the problem.
>
> Nei
>
>
>
> On 09/09/2007, Duncan Coutts <duncan.coutts at worc.ox.ac.uk> wrote:
> > On Sat, 2007-09-08 at 14:50 +0100, Neil Mitchell wrote:
> > > Hi Neil,
> > >
> > > > Given that GHC 6.8 is just around the corner and, given how it has
> > > > re-organised the libraries so that the dependencies in many (most/all)
> > > > the packages in the hackage DB are now not correct.
> > > >
> > > > Is there a plan of how to get hackage DB up to speed with GHC 6.8 ?
> > >
> > > I think whatever we go with will be deeply painful. Especially given
> > > the switch to Cabal configurations comes at the same time, rather than
> > > before.
> >
> > Cabal 1.2 is out now and supports configurations and current ghc:
> >
> > http://haskell.org/cabal/download.html
> >
> > Duncan
> >
> >
>