Hi Don, I take the liberty of quoting you in full on d-haskell, I assume you forgot to CC it. Am Samstag, den 18.07.2009, 14:29 -0700 schrieb Don Stewart: > > Am Samstag, den 18.07.2009, 14:14 -0700 schrieb Don Stewart: > > > General rule I'm following on Arch: provide what the latest platform > > > spec specifies. If a package is not in the platform list, provide the > > > newest version. > > > > > > http://code.haskell.org/haskell-platform/haskell-platform.cabal > > > > > > Could someone put together a page listing the state of the platform spec > > > against Debian? Seems like we must be getting pretty close to .debs for > > > everything in the platform list? > > > > At the hackathon in Freiburg I wrote this, which still seems to be > > running :-) > > http://people.debian.org/~nomeata/hackagevsdebian.html > > > > Not sure if it gets all cabal ←→ debian name mappings right, but it > > should be a start. > > > > > > About HTTP: 40000007 vs 40000006 seems to be an API-compatible bugfix > > release, based on the version number (but just guessing, HTTP uses a > > non-standard versioning, it seems). If that’s the case, I wonder if it > > is useful to ship the older version. > > The only reason to ship the older version would be to claim 2009.2.1 > compliance to the platform. > > > In general I find the lack of a standard changelog in cabal packages > > problematic, there is no easy and consistent way of finding out what > > changed between 40000006 and 40000007. The .cabal field only specify a > > homepage, which sometimes might contain a useful changelog, but in this > > example does not, and the link to the git repository is dead. > > Also, we need to know if packages support the policy version > specification (as HTTP does), which lets us make decisions about API > compatibility. Now I wonder what makes more sense for Debian, which aims mostly at well integrated packages within Debian: * Ship the platform 2009.2.1 unmodified with a slightly older version of HTTP, or * ship a platform 2009.2.1-debian, which would use HTTP 40000007, assuming that 40000007 is an improvement over 40000005, but having the same API, which would be manually checked and decided by the Debian maintainer. Given how expensive it is to ship two versions of the same package in Debian (in contrast to Hackage), I tend to prefer the second version (quality before standardization), but I guess this needs some more discussion on d-haskell and beyond. (Disclaimer: this is theoretical, I did not yet look at the HTTP differences. Also, I’m in the process of packing my bags for DebConf :-)) Greetings, JOachim -- Joachim "nomeata" Breitner Debian Developer nomeata@debian.org | ICQ# 74513189 | GPG-Keyid: 4743206C JID: nomeata@joachim-breitner.de | http://people.debian.org/~nomeata
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil