[Haskell-cafe] Hackage being too strict?

[Gwern Branwen]

On 2008.04.15 22:15:29 -0500, John Goerzen <jgoerzen at complete.org> scribbled 0.7K characters:
> When I went to make my upload of MissingH 1.0.1, Hackage rejected it,
> saying:
>
> Instead of 'ghc-options: -XPatternSignatures' use 'extensions: PatternSignatures'
>
> It hadn't rejected MissingH 1.0.0, even though it had the same thing.
>
> Now, my .cabal file has this:
>
>  -- Hack because ghc-6.6 and the Cabal the comes with ghc-6.8.1
>  -- does not understand the PatternSignatures extension.
>  -- The Cabal that comes with ghc-6.8.2 does understand it, so
>  -- this hack can be dropped if we require Cabal-Version: >=1.2.3
>  If impl(ghc >= 6.8)
>    GHC-Options: -XPatternSignatures
>
> which was contributed by Duncan Coutts.
>
> It seems arbitrary that Hackage would suddenly reject this valid
> usage.
>
> Thoughts?

Doesn't strike me as being any more arbitrary than demanding a Build-type: field.

--
gwern
submiss mega Audiotel meta SUBACS JSOTF NMIC EIP RAID CRA
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-cafe/attachments/20080415/d9bd506a/attachment.bin