[Haskell-cafe] Platform Versioning Policy: upper bounds are not our friends

Ivan Lazar Miljenovic ivan.miljenovic at gmail.com
Thu Aug 16 15:20:05 CEST 2012

On 16 August 2012 20:50, Ketil Malde <ketil at malde.org> wrote:
> "Bryan O'Sullivan" <bos at serpentine.com> writes:
>> I propose that the sense of the recommendation around upper bounds in the
>> PVP be reversed: upper bounds should be specified *only when there is a
>> known problem with a new version* of a depended-upon package.
> Another advantage to this is that it's not always clear what constitutes
> an API change.  I had to put an upper bound on binary, since 0.5
> introduced laziness changes that broke my program.  (I later got some
> help to implement a workaround, but binary-0.4.4 is still substantially
> faster).  Understandably, the authors didn't see this as a breaking API
> change.

Except 0.4 -> 0.5 _is_ a major version bump according to the PVP.

> So, +1.
> -k
> --
> If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of giants
> _______________________________________________
> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
> Haskell-Cafe at haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe

Ivan Lazar Miljenovic
Ivan.Miljenovic at gmail.com

More information about the Haskell-Cafe mailing list