[Haskell-community] haskell.org download page

[Adam Bergmark]

On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 12:23 PM, Simon Marlow <marlowsd at gmail.com> wrote:

> The choice boils down to whether you want stack to manage your GHC
> installation or not.
>
> I personally find it distasteful.  This has been the biggest blocker for
> me using stack, it wants to control more of my workflow than I want to give
> it, leading to an overlap of responsibilities.
>




> (I do use stack, but only with external GHC installations, and I often get
> into a mess when it tries to download another GHC)
>

I have also been using stack with external GHCs up until now, but I have
never had this issue.


> Having said that, is it better for new users to delegate the GHC
> installation to stack?  I don't know.  It certainly has the downside that
> you can't just type "ghci" and get a prompt.
>
> The world seems simpler when it consists of
> - GHC installations
> - build tools that use your GHC installations and manage local package
> building
>
> But when my build tool manages my GHC installations, there's now a layer
> of abstraction in the way of GHC and I can't figure out how to interact
> directly with GHC any more.  Also I can't use cabal (which I often do).
>
> So, I'd argue for HP minimal to be the default download option.  By all
> means recommend stack as the default build tool - I'm sure it's less
> problematic for most people to get Stackage by default, and cabal isn't set
> up to use Stackage out of the box.
>
> Can't we get rid of HP Full?  I don't see a use for that any more.
>
> Cheers
> Simon
>
>
> On 29 August 2016 at 16:29, Nicolas Wu <nicolas.wu at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I think having multiple options is confusing to beginners, and so I'd
>> like to see a single download option on the download page.
>>
>> For me it's important that we have a way for beginners to use tools like
>> ghc and ghci on the command line directly in order to run small throw-away
>> programs.
>>
>> The decision about how to manage projects and their dependencies should
>> be open and isn't for beginners, whether that be using stack or cabal: both
>> have their merits, and I don't want to push one over the other. The default
>> installation should provide both of these as well as other tools core to
>> building ghc.
>>
>> As such, I'm in favour of having the HP as the only option.
>>
>> Nick
>>
>> On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 5:50 AM Jason Dagit <dagitj at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello all,
>>>
>>> I just realized that the Minimal installer listed first on the Downloads
>>> page (https://www.haskell.org/downloads) is deprecated and "dead". This
>>> creates an unfortunate situation where our top suggested way to get haskell
>>> immediately tells the user it's dead.
>>>
>>> I think that we should remove mention of the minimal installer ASAP on
>>> the grounds that the HP now comes in minimal and full variants.
>>>
>>> Furthermore, I would like to make the recommendation that we list the HP
>>> above other methods as even the minimal HP installer ships with stack (at
>>> least on windows it does).
>>>
>>> Between the two changes, I think the first one is crucial and the second
>>> one is merely reasonable.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Jason
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Haskell-community mailing list
>>> Haskell-community at haskell.org
>>> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-community
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Haskell-community mailing list
>> Haskell-community at haskell.org
>> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-community
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Haskell-community mailing list
> Haskell-community at haskell.org
> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-community
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-community/attachments/20160830/25942ff8/attachment.html>