Gearing up (again) for the next release: 2014.2.0.0

[Yitzchak Gale]

I wrote:
>> So it's moot for this release. But in principle, what would
>> have been the problem with having the platform installers
>> ship with the 1.20 executable, or build the 1.20 executable
>> in a sandbox for installers that build it, and then still ship
>> with Cabal-1.18. in the libraries?

Ivan Lazar Miljenovic wrote:
> Linux distros that don't use pre-built binaries, especially
> source-based ones where having cabal-install-1.2 would require
> building Cabal-1.20?

It would be built only on the machine building the package,
and there only inside a sandbox. It would not need to be part
of the distro itself.

> (Then again, unless it's people learning Haskell and being told to
> install the platform, I would imagine that many people on Linux
> wouldn't use the platform itself and just install whatever libraries
> they want.)

Generally, it makes sense for *users* of Haskell - whether
beginners or not - to start with the platform. People working on
developing the Haskell ecosystem might start with a more recent
GHC, but even then the platform often makes sense as a default
starting point.

>> On a related note: are we sure that we want cabal-install
>> to print the upgrade message whenever a newer version
>> is available on hackage?

> Maybe have that as a config option? It's still helpful for people that
> built cabal-install themselves and know what they're doing?

Makes sense.

Thanks,
Yitz