Proposal: splitting the network package
michael at snoyman.com
Fri Feb 8 14:33:12 CET 2013
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 8:40 AM, Kazu Yamamoto <kazu at iij.ad.jp> wrote:
> > Well, that approach requires the creation of an extra package and
> > deprecating the main package, forcing users to have to learn about a new
> > package. I'd rather not have to rename a package just because I want to
> > off one piece of functionality to a separate package.
> I think that Michael should write two approaches in the document.
> And we should choose one out of two for "network".
I've written up the approach I advocated and put it in a Google document
for comments. I'd rather not volunteer to write up an explanation of
someone else's approach, as I might guess some of the details wrong.
Note that my stated objectives (particularly 5) may go beyond what we'd
previously been discussing here, but they all came up in my work on
http-conduit/http-conduit-browser, so I think it likely that the need will
resurface for someone else in the future.
I'll be back online on Sunday to review comments and to add the second half
on merge strategies (which admittedly I have not thought about quite as
much). If there's consensus with the document, I can move it to the Haskell
Wiki, or wherever else someone thinks would be more logical.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Libraries