Re: haskell-filepath and hlibrary.mk

To: debian-haskell@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: haskell-filepath and hlibrary.mk
From: Erik de Castro Lopo <mle+hs@mega-nerd.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 22:30:13 +1100
Message-id: <[🔎] 20091123223013.22407f40.mle+hs@mega-nerd.com>
Reply-to: debian-haskell@lists.debian.org
In-reply-to: <[🔎] 1258974278.3078.21.camel@localhost>
References: <[🔎] 1258552455.3166.42.camel@localhost> <[🔎] 1258799791.2726.9.camel@zezinho> <[🔎] 1258974278.3078.21.camel@localhost>

Joachim Breitner wrote:

> I’m also unsure about what name is better. Eventually, we might indeed
> get more haskell compilers in Debian, in which case the
> haskell-blubb-doc name makes more sense. But the similarity to
> libghc6-blubb-dev is useful as well. Can we have more opinions here?

For the record, I like libghc6-blubb-*.

Erik
-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Erik de Castro Lopo
http://www.mega-nerd.com/

Reply to:

References:
- haskell-filepath and hlibrary.mk
  - From: Joachim Breitner <nomeata@debian.org>
- Re: haskell-filepath and hlibrary.mk
  - From: Marco Túlio Gontijo e Silva <marcot@riseup.net>
- Re: haskell-filepath and hlibrary.mk
  - From: Joachim Breitner <nomeata@debian.org>

Prev by Date: Re: build-depend on doc packages?
Next by Date: Re: Hackage vs. uscan (debian/watch) in darcs.d.o repos
Previous by thread: Re: haskell-filepath and hlibrary.mk
Next by thread: doc packages names (was: haskell-filepath and hlibrary.mk)
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread