[Haskell-cafe] base version numbers

[Tom Ellis]

On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 06:09:51PM +1000, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic wrote:
> On 16 June 2016 at 17:58, Tom Ellis
> <tom-lists-haskell-cafe-2013 at jaguarpaw.co.uk> wrote:
> > Since each version of GHC depends precisely on one version of base, would it
> > not be more clear to name them after their version of GHC, rather than
> > 4.x.y.z?
> 
> Except that:
> 
> * That would break the Package Versioning Policy and thus make it more
> difficult to determine to what extent there are any potentially
> breaking changes

Why's that?

When GHC x.y.z depends on base a.b.c.d, a and b only depend on x and y, and
vice versa.  Seems like this condition implies that the PVP would be upheld.

> * Makes it more difficult for an alternate Haskell implementation to
> use the Prelude

I don't understand that.  Surely an alternate Haskell implementation cannot
depend on base?  It's far too GHC specific.

> * Makes it more difficult for a potential future where versions of
> base are less tightly coupled to GHC and can thus be installed
> separately (rather than needing a new version of GHC to get a new
> feature from base)

Is that really realistic?

Tom