[Haskell-cafe] Proposal: Hackage's packages should be seperated by buildable

[Rogan Creswick]

On Sun, Aug 25, 2013 at 12:48 AM, He-chien Tsai <depot051 at gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm sick for checking whether package is obsolete or not.
> I think packages build failed long time ago should be collected and moved
> to another page until someone fix them, or hackage pages should have a
> filter for checking obsolete packages.
>

I don't believe hackage can (currently) do this with a sufficient level of
precision.

*Many* packages fail to build on hackage because they depend on c-libraries
that need to be installed externally from cabal. There are some mitigations
for this in the works (although, it's been that way for some time now...).

Hackage 2 should have some community-involvement features (such as ratings,
tags, etc..) that can enable better rankings of packages, and there is a
hackage reverse-dependencies database that can also be used as a rough
indicator of stability.

That said, I do firmly believe that we should have multiple instances of
hackage at various levels of stability (and at corresponding levels of
scrutiny). At the moment, we have the Haskell Platform on one end of this
continuum of stability, and hackage at the other.  It would be useful to
have something in the middle.

--Rogan




>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
> Haskell-Cafe at haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-cafe/attachments/20130825/73b43d4d/attachment.htm>