[HF-discuss] [Haskell-cafe] Do something about Cabal? Not yet!

Wed Dec 23 22:06:09 UTC 2020

I agree with Richard, but would like to caution that doing something 
about our build tools is, while very important, also very risky, if 
history is to serve as a lesson. I think I would prefer to see the 
Haskell Foundation "warm up" on some easier battles to build consensus 
and gain momentum before wading into these treacherous waters.

John

On 12/10/20 2:50 PM, Richard Eisenberg via hf-discuss wrote:
> In my view, a lack of communication like the one highlighted here is 
> exactly what the Haskell Foundation hopes to improve. It's still being 
> bootstrapped, so don't expect any action soon, but I would hope for 
> forward motion by the springtime.
>
> Of course, the HF needs all of us to be the best foundation it can -- 
> so please consider nominating yourself for a board position 
> (https://haskell.foundation/board-nominations/ 
> <https://haskell.foundation/board-nominations/>) and/or applying for 
> the executive director (full-time, salaried) position 
> (https://haskell.foundation/ed-job-description/ 
> <https://haskell.foundation/ed-job-description/>)! In either role, you 
> could have direct impact on moving this all forward.
>
> Richard
>
>> On Dec 10, 2020, at 6:42 AM, Allen Sobot via hf-discuss 
>> <hf-discuss at haskell.org <mailto:hf-discuss at haskell.org>> wrote:
>>
>> As a still (very) new Haskell user by many measures, indeed the 
>> little experience I had with Cabal isn't great overall in my view 
>> (honestly not a fan of Stack grabbing separate GHC instances though 
>> either unless I pass like 2 command-line flags, if there's a 
>> configuration option I'm not aware of I'd be grateful).
>>
>> I had no clue about the communication issues etc. plaguing Cabal, 
>> that explains a bit...
>>
>> In any case I'd like to try to contribute what I can to this effort, 
>> mainly to improve the UX which I agree is absolutely terrible in my 
>> humble opinion.
>>
>> (Side note: I was informed on another mailing list that I may have 
>> some setting pertaining to forcing some kind of read receipt which is 
>> considered impolite on mailing lists, if this is still the case I 
>> apologize and I'm trying to determine what even is the precise issue 
>> or setting controlling it, at least on K-9 Mail and Neomutt)
>>
>> On December 10, 2020 12:23:42 p.m. GMT+01:00, Ignat Insarov 
>> <kindaro at gmail.com <mailto:kindaro at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> # Do something about Cabal?
>>>
>>> Hello.
>>>
>>> Cabal is the second most used tool in Haskell after GHC. It has many
>>> problems. It may be noticed that there is one and a half developers 
>>> working on
>>> it. This is clearly not enough to address these problems. I propose 
>>> that this is
>>> a good place to invest in.
>>>
>>> ### Problems I have in mind:
>>>
>>> * Poor communication, lack of open source development process.
>>>
>>> The whole Cabal–Stack schism appears to be an outcome of poor
>>> communication. One of the leading developers of Cabal is even banned 
>>> from
>>> participation somewhere in Stack circles.[1] Personally, I reported 
>>> several
>>> issues to Cabal and every single time it resulted in sadness. Observe a
>>> vicious circle: core developers are overworked ⇒ they are being 
>>> unfriendly ⇒
>>> there are fewer contributors ⇒ core developers are overworked.
>>>
>>> I have no hard evidence but it appears that presently, more people 
>>> that strive
>>> to improve the Haskell build experience are outside the Cabal cabal 
>>> than are
>>> inside.
>>>
>>> * User experience is an afterthought.
>>>
>>> Cabal's user experience is horrifying. A collection of complaints is 
>>> being
>>> compiled elsewhere.[2] There are also bugs being opened to Cabal 
>>> because of
>>> this, requiring triage and therefore wasting the precious time of 
>>> the few
>>> overworked developers. Stack is much more friendly — this shows by 
>>> example
>>> that the user experience problem is not inherent and may be solved.
>>>
>>> It is ordinary to receive output like this:
>>>
>>> ```
>>> % cabal run example-executable
>>> Warning: The package list for 'hackage.haskell.org 
>>> <http://hackage.haskell.org>' is 84 days old.
>>> Run 'cabal update' to get the latest list of available packages.
>>> Resolving dependencies...
>>> cabal: Could not resolve dependencies:
>>> [__0] trying: example-0.1.0.6 (user goal)
>>> [__1] next goal: opaleye (dependency of example)
>>> [__1] rejecting: opaleye-0.7.1.0, opaleye-0.7.0.0 (constraint from 
>>> project
>>> config TODO requires ==0.6.7006.1)
>>> [__1] rejecting: opaleye-0.6.7006.1 (conflict: example => opaleye^>=0.7)
>>> [__1] skipping: opaleye-0.6.7006.0, opaleye-0.6.7005.0, 
>>> opaleye-0.6.7004.2,
>>> opaleye-0.6.7004.1, opaleye-0.6.7004.0, opaleye-0.6.7003.1,
>>> opaleye-0.6.7003.0, opaleye-0.6.1.0, opaleye-0.6.0.0, opaleye-0.5.4.0,
>>> opaleye-0.5.3.1, opaleye-0.5.3.0, opaleye-0.5.2.2, opaleye-0.5.2.0,
>>> opaleye-0.5.1.1, opaleye-0.5.1.0, opaleye-0.5.0.0, opaleye-0.4.2.0,
>>> opaleye-0.4.1.0, opaleye-0.4.0.0, opaleye-0.3.1.2, opaleye-0.3.1, 
>>> opaleye-0.3,
>>> opaleye-0.2, opaleye-0.6.7002.0, opaleye-0.6.7001.0, opaleye-0.6.7000.0,
>>> opaleye-0.5.2.1, opaleye-0.3.1.1 (has the same characteristics that 
>>> caused the
>>> previous version to fail: excluded by constraint '^>=0.7' from example)
>>> [__1] fail (backjumping, conflict set: example, opaleye)
>>> After searching the rest of the dependency tree exhaustively, these 
>>> were the
>>> goals I've had most trouble fulfilling: opaleye, example
>>> ```
>>>
>>> There are so many things that are wrong here. Even a sneaky _«to do»_
>>> remark. If you wonder, in this case the solution is to remove and 
>>> re-generate
>>> `cabal.project.freeze`.
>>>
>>> Even the name of the program — it is actually _«cabal-install»_ — is
>>> incomprehensible, it should be re-branded to Cabal, which is how 
>>> everyone
>>> calls it anyway.
>>>
>>> * Features are not being introduced.
>>>
>>> There is no reason for two build tools to exist. The killer feature 
>>> of Stack —
>>> snapshots — should be supported by Cabal. Possibly Cabal itself 
>>> should be
>>> refactored and split so that there are separate tools for packaging, 
>>> version
>>> resolution and human interaction — I do not know. But certainly the 
>>> way things
>>> are presently is a waste of developer effort and a source of 
>>> confusion for
>>> everyone.
>>>
>>> ### My proposition, in particular.
>>>
>>> * Ask all the people that show compassion to the cause of a great 
>>> Haskell build
>>> tool to unite and work together on a better Cabal. This includes the
>>> developers of Stack and everyone that expressed unhappiness with the 
>>> current
>>> state of Cabal. These people should be seen as a blessing, not as an 
>>> obstacle.
>>> * Put in place a clear process for contributing and decision making, 
>>> so that it
>>> does not come down to the privileged opinion of one of the core 
>>> developers.
>>> * Make a model of user experience that Cabal should conform to, and make
>>> conformance a priority. Surely there are among us people that know a 
>>> thing or
>>> two about user experience — call for them to step forward. Every 
>>> issue that
>>> stems from misunderstanding, re-assign to the model instead of closing.
>>> * Merge the support of Stackage snapshots into Cabal. Ask the core 
>>> developers of
>>> Stack to join the effort. Transition from Stack to Cabal should be 
>>> one well
>>> discoverable command that just works.
>>>
>>> I realize that this letter is largely an opinion piece. You can also 
>>> see it as
>>> an _«ideal piece»_. Without an ideal, without a vision, we are stuck 
>>> with the
>>> present. I do not insist that my vision is the best. But the present 
>>> reality is
>>> not the best vision either. I propose, foremost, that we work and 
>>> fight for a
>>> better future.
>>>
>>> [1]: https://github.com/commercialhaskell/stackage/issues/4472 
>>> <https://github.com/commercialhaskell/stackage/issues/4472>
>>> [2]: 
>>> https://github.com/tomjaguarpaw/tilapia/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+cabal 
>>> <https://github.com/tomjaguarpaw/tilapia/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+cabal>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
>>> To (un)subscribe, modify options or view archives go to:
>>> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe 
>>> <http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe>
>>> Only members subscribed via the mailman list are allowed to post.
>> _______________________________________________
>> hf-discuss mailing list
>> hf-discuss at haskell.org <mailto:hf-discuss at haskell.org>
>> https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hf-discuss 
>> <https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hf-discuss>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> hf-discuss mailing list
> hf-discuss at haskell.org
> https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hf-discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/hf-discuss/attachments/20201223/26df9ed1/attachment-0001.html>