Gearing up (again) for the next release: 2014.2.0.0

[Michael Snoyman]

On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Johan Tibell <johan.tibell at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 12:19 PM, Michael Snoyman <michael at snoyman.com>wrote:
>
>> I'm not arguing about upper bounds in general. I don't dispute (and never
>> had!) that upper bounds can in many cases allow builds to succeed where
>> they would otherwise fail. I'm speaking specifically about the case of the
>> Haskell Platform, which makes all version bounds in the package itself
>> irrelevant by hard-coding exact versions of all dependencies.
>>
>
> The packages in the HP still needs upper bounds as the user can install
> packages that require newer versions of packages that are in the platform
> and a lack of upper bounds in the platform packages would cause cabal to
> incorrectly try the HP version instead of installing a newer version,
> causing a build failure.
>
>
I'm afraid I don't follow what you're saying. Yes, the tls package could
still be installed by someone who's not using the Haskell Platform, and
then all the same reasons for having upper bounds apply. But I'm not sure
how adding tls to the HP would somehow make this problem worse, which I
*think* is what you're implying. Can you clarify?

Michael
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/libraries/attachments/20140409/0ff00626/attachment.html>