iavor.diatchki at gmail.com
Fri Aug 14 08:28:54 EDT 2009
I know the the Haskell Platform is in the spot-light at the moment but
please do not mix it in into name conventions as well! Different
packages can provide modules with the same name, so it seems perfectly
reasonable to let programmers choose the names for their modules.
PS: Having lived in the US for a while I would prefer Color to Colour
but obviously that is not particularly important.
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 7:39 PM, Ian Lynagh<igloo at earth.li> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 08:33:24PM -0400, roconnor at theorem.ca wrote:
>> According to
>> I'm supposed to ask here for bits of heirarchy. I have no idea if this
>> is still the procedure. As far as I know nobody follows this procedure.
>> But I could just be ignorant. :)
>> I'd like Data.Colour for my colour package:
>> I should point out that <http://hackage.haskell.org/package/AC-Colour>
>> also used Data.Colour, so there is a conflict to be resolved here.
> I think that if there is a package called "colour", then it should be
> the one to provide Data.Colour.
> I don't have any opinion on whether that should be your package, AC's
> package, or neither (as I haven't really looked at either of them).
> Maybe this should be decided by whatever process we end up with for
> Haskell Platform inclusion?
> Libraries mailing list
> Libraries at haskell.org
More information about the Libraries