package description fields
ijones at syntaxpolice.org
Thu Jan 13 11:43:16 EST 2005
Ross Paterson <ross at soi.city.ac.uk> writes:
> Is there any difference between Homepage and Package-Url? Can one of
> them be removed?
I think package-url is meant to be the "click here to download the
cabal-ized tarball of this very package" and homepage is meant to be
the homepage. package-url is for Hackage, and homepage is for human
consumption. I think package-url will end up being manditory (if you
want to get your tool into hackage).
> How about moving Build-Depends to the package level (and maybe calling
> it Depends)?
That makes sense.
> Is it sufficient to put License: BSD3 in the package description?
> Or should License-File be mandatory, and License just an optional
I don't really want to force people to Do the Right Thing necessarily,
I just want to force them to think about a license before they put
something in Hackage.
> (Some people seem to think they should put a copy of the entire licence
> in each source file. :-)
I once had an open-source project pulled out from under me and made
closed source. So I'm a bit obsessive about it.
> It doesn't seem to be very useful to have both a library and executables
> that use it in the same package (at least with the meaning implemented
> for GHC). One has to list all the library modules again under each
Which field are you referring to here? buildDepends? I think I
More information about the Libraries