[Haskell-cafe] Checking in packages to Hackage early in development cycle?

[minh thu]

2009/3/20 Colin Paul Adams <colin at colina.demon.co.uk>:
>>>>>> "Duncan" == Duncan Coutts <duncan.coutts at worc.ox.ac.uk> writes:
>
>    Duncan> On Thu, 2009-03-19 at 12:56 -0400, Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH wrote:
>    >> On 2009 Mar 19, at 12:39, Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH wrote:
>> > On 2009 Mar 19, at 12:30, Colin Paul Adams wrote:
>> >>>>>>> "Max" == Max Rabkin <max.rabkin at gmail.com> writes:
>    >> >>
>    >> >> Max> On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 4:41 PM, Manlio Perillo
>    >> >>   Max> <manlio_perillo at libero.it> wrote:
>    >> >>
>    >> >> Max> Personally, I think that there is little harm in
>    >> releasing a >> Max> package if it does something useful in a
>    >> not-totally-broken >> Max> way. Especially if you plan to
>    >> extend it.
>    >> >>
>    >> >> Suppose you intend to extend it, and are not sure yet if the
>    >> >> interface >> will change as a result?
>    >> >
>    >> > Generally you indicate this by changing the minor version:
>    >> 0.3.0, > 0.3.1, etc. have compatible APIs, but 0.4.0 has an
>    >> incompatible > API.  And with major version 0, API breakage is
>    >> expected in new > releases.
>
>    Duncan> We call it the Package versioning policy (PVP)
>
>    Duncan> http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Package_versioning_policy
>
>    Duncan> Package authors are encouraged but not required to follow
>    Duncan> it. In the not too distant future you will be able to
>    Duncan> explicitly opt-in, in which case we will try to check that
>    Duncan> the package does indeed follow the policy and advising
>    Duncan> authors of dependent packages about the kind of version
>    Duncan> constraints they should use.
>
> I missed the upper bounds on dependencies. How am I supposed to know
> what the upper bound is?

I don't know what is the consensus, but I always thought that
dependencies should simply state what versions work. So the upper
bound would be the current version. If a new version appears, just
bump the version too, even if nothing changed in the code.

Makes sense ?

Thu