On the scope of 'directory' (and which issue tracker to use)

[Edward Kmett]

Pointing the issue tracker to the correct place makes a lot of sense. Same
with changing the description.

-Edward

On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 1:35 PM, Phil Ruffwind <rf at rufflewind.com> wrote:

> Looking at the current API, it seems that the 'directory' library has been
> extended to more than just mere directory-related operations: it includes
> several file-related utilities as well.  It looks to me that 'directory'
> has
> become a place for consolidating filesystem-related operations for *nix and
> Windows platforms.
>
> Given the state of things, would it be more appropriate to call it a
> "platform-agnostic library for filesystem operations" rather than a
> "library
> for directory manipulation"?  (Of course, the name of the library and its
> modules would remain slightly misleading but oh well.)
>
> On an unrelated issue, seeing as most of the issues are on GitHub rather
> than
> Trac (and I personally find the former simpler to use) perhaps the .cabal
> file
> should point to the GitHub issue tracker instead?
>
> --
> Phil
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/libraries/attachments/20150303/687f1d77/attachment.html>