qualified imports, PVP and so on

[Michael Snoyman]

On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 2:03 PM, Johan Tibell <johan.tibell at gmail.com>wrote:

> I think we should relax the PVP requirement to bump the major version
> number when adding an instance and instead require that the major version
> bump is only required when using orphan instances and otherwise only a
> minor version bump is required. Unless I missed some case, code that
> depends on a library that follows this rule should not not break.
>
> Here's my reasoning:
>
> If you add a non-orphan instance, it must be because
>
>  * you define the data type or the type class in your package and
>  * depend on a package that declares the other entity.
>
> Therefore, no package that depend on your package can declare a non-orphan
> instance that could collide with the instance you declare.
>
>
>
+1. If we're discussing PVP changes, the other one I'd like to propose is:

Don't include upper bounds on base, template-haskell, or other libraries
which cannot be upgraded, unless you know with certainty that your package
will not compile with those other versions. Motivation:

* The bounds will never help cabal choose a better build plan.
* The bounds may cause valid builds to never be attempted.
* The bounds make it very difficult to check and debug new versions of GHC.
* Including the bounds if you know the build will fail makes for more
user-friendly messages.
* Leaving off the bounds if you're not certain will result in users getting
more verbose error messages. While uglier, these error messages will be
helpful for the package maintainer to adjust the package for the new
version of GHC.

I'd also want to push the bounds a little bit further a make a distinction
between experimental and stable packages, but that's a bigger proposal and
I'd rather start with something more modest.

Michael
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/libraries/attachments/20140226/ea44fb6f/attachment.html>