[core libraries] List of core libraries

[Neil Mitchell]

Great. I think filepath could do with a bit of TLC, and I am happy to
do that. There are lots of things that are looking a little crusty
around the edges (I don't think the test suite will actually fail in
Travis if there is an error, it refers to dead web pages, the README
talks a lot about Yhc).

I see Herbert and Ian before him have done a reasonable amount of work
to keep it in a GHC'able state, and I wouldn't want to cause any
difficulties there. So two main questions:

* Where/how should I push changes? Should I start with pull requests
to the filepath module? Should I clone it to ndmitchell and that
become the official repo? Should I get added to the haskell group?

* What's the integration with GHC? Does the filepath module get pulled
directly into GHC source trees? I see it's in the GHC test suite - is
that considered a good idea? I'm a fan of testing my packages to
destruction outside the GHC tree, but if people think its valuable it
can stay - my main worry is breaking the GHC test suite inadvertently
by not updating the expected stdout (which Travis doesn't currently
check).

Thanks, Neil


On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 11:16 PM, Edward Kmett <ekmett at gmail.com> wrote:
> It is your library as much as you want it to be. As such you can consider
> yourself as the maintainer and under
> http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Library_submissions
>
> Changes that simply widen the API by adding new functions are a bit of a
> grey area. It's better to consult the community, because there may be useful
> feedback about (say) the order of arguments, or the name of the function, or
> whatnot. On the other hand few clients will actually break if you add a new
> function to the API. Use your judgment.
>
> Here you have a pretty obvious combinator, with one obvious argument
> ordering I'd assume, so you should be able to do as you see fit.
>
> The core libraries committee can help as much or as little as you want us to
> around filepath.
>
> -Edward
>
> On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Neil Mitchell <ndmitchell at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I did semi-hand the filepath library over to the Core libraries
>> committee, it was just about 6 years before the committee formed so
>> you probably don't have records of it, which is why libraries@ is
>> listed as the author. I'm happy to take a more active role in
>> maintaining it. In particular, I was intending to review/comment on
>> https://github.com/haskell/filepath/pulls, and have the intention to
>> add a bunch of patches
>> (https://github.com/ndmitchell/shake/issues/174). Most of the patches
>> are either obviously a good idea (fixing broken code) or improving the
>> docs. The only one which could have any debate surrounding it is the
>> introduction of a new operator -<.>. I don't want to debate that now,
>> but it would be good to get clarification as to whether I should
>> unilaterally add it, or should go through the libraries submission
>> process, or ...
>>
>> Thanks, Neil
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 4:17 PM, Andrew Gill <andygill at ku.edu> wrote:
>> > All,
>> >
>> > I’ve not touched hoc for quite a while. KU now has the resources to take
>> > ownership, if needed. It’s pretty stable, from what I understand, but
>> > could
>> > do with the an updated manual.
>> >
>> > Andy Gill
>> >
>> > On Sep 28, 2014, at 1:45 PM, Edward Kmett <ekmett at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > Herbert:
>> >
>> > Heretofore I'd been treating filepath as owned by Neil Mitchell, but
>> > that
>> > statement does sound like he's handed it off to the libraries process,
>> > which
>> > would make it a core-libraries issue if he doesn't want to deal with it.
>> >
>> > I'm copying him on this thread to get his opinion.
>> >
>> > I've also copied Andy Gill, to see if he has any opinions on the state
>> > of
>> > who owns update responsibility for hpc itself.
>> >
>> > Andy, Neil: Thoughts?
>> >
>> > Thomas: Thanks for forcing this issue to attention.
>> >
>> > -Edward
>> >
>> > On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 2:14 PM, Herbert Valerio Riedel
>> > <hvriedel at gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On 2014-09-28 at 19:40:25 +0200, Thomas Miedema wrote:
>> >>
>> >> [...]
>> >>
>> >> > Ok, final question: What about filepath and hpc? Their .cabal files
>> >> > list
>> >> > libraries at haskell.org as maintainer, which usually means the Core
>> >> > Libraries
>> >> > Committee. Should filepath be added to that list, and the maintainer
>> >> > for
>> >> > both filepath and hpc be set to the Core Libraries Committee? If not,
>> >> > who
>> >> > maintains filepath?
>> >>
>> >> This is supposed to be an answer, but rather additional data-points:
>> >>
>> >> As far as filepath is concerned:
>> >>
>> >>   http://community.haskell.org/~ndm/filepath/
>> >>
>> >> states
>> >>
>> >> | The library is now part of the core Haskell libraries, and since GHC
>> >> | 6.6.1 has been shipped with all major compilers. While I am the
>> >> | original author, changes are now made through the library submissions
>> >> | process.
>> >>
>> >> as for Hpc, if you look at its changelog over at
>> >>
>> >>   http://git.haskell.org/packages/hpc.git/shortlog
>> >>
>> >> it's been effectively maintained by GHC HQ for the last couple of
>> >> years...
>> >
>> >
>> >
>
>