dagitj at gmail.com
Mon Oct 24 20:08:50 CEST 2011
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 12:53 AM, Ashley Yakeley <ashley at semantic.org> wrote:
> On Sun, 2011-10-23 at 06:11 +0200, Michael Snoyman wrote:
>> Perhaps this belongs in a separate discussion, but is there any plan
>> to have time provide the locale stuff directly instead of our code
>> needing to depend on old-locale? If I'm not mistaken, implementing
>> such a strategy at the same time would mean that user code could then
>> ignore two old-* packages.
> No, locale is not part of time. Nor am I interested in taking
> responsibility for it.
> According to http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Library_submissions ,
> old-locale is "maintained only for backward compatibility". And yet
> no-one can tell me where any new "locale" package is or why the old
> "locale" became "old-locale" or what might count as "forward"
> compatibility. Nor do I know of any particular problems with it, but
> then I haven't examined its subject area particularly closely.
I've tripped on this as well. Putting 'old-foo' in a cabal file feels
wrong, but when I looked I also couldn't find any discussion as to why
it is called old-locale.
More information about the Libraries