Haskell Platform decision: time to bless parsec 3?

[Christian Maeder]

I still favor parsec 2 over parsec 3 because

a) parsec 3 is no longer haskell98 (as major parts of parsec 2 are)

b) I don't like the compatibility layer (modules with re-exports) of
parsec 3 for parsec 2

Without the compatibility layer (b) and making the package a new major
version of parsec, we would probably not discuss this issue.

I think the maintainers of "parsec 3" should create new package
"parsec3" without the compatibility layer. A new package parsec2 was
already created.

There are simply no blessed parser packages!

The problem is that so many package simply have "parsec" as dependency,
otherwise I would vote for removing parsec from HP (or vote for parsec2).

Christian

Am 06.11.2010 16:18, schrieb Don Stewart:
> Hey all,
> 
> This is a loose end in the package policy situation: when the HP has a
> major upgrade, the policy is to do all major upgrades for any packages
> contained in the HP, as long as they don't add new dependencies.
> 
> One exception to this rule has been parsec, where parsec 2 was
> considered "blessed" on an ad hoc basis.
> 
> I propose we agree to remove this ad hoc rule, and thus the HP will ship
> with parsec 3.
> 
> Does anyone have concerns with this?
> 
> -- Don