Hi David, Am Mittwoch, den 27.05.2015, 15:39 -0700 schrieb David Fox: > On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 1:04 PM, Joachim Breitner <nomeata@debian.org> > wrote: > > Also, it opens a new can of worm: Do we have to provide > libghcjs-foo > packages for all our Haskell libraries? For none? For a few? > > We build more and more libghcjs-* packages. I did the > haskell-devscripts patches to support this. that’s great! My worry is not so much whether it is possible to package libraries for GHCJS (it is, thanks to your work), but more the complications it causes for packaging Haskell. For example, what if we upgrade library foo to a new version, and that fails to work with GHCJS. Do we promise to patch it then? Do we simply drop the libghcjs packages (and all its reverse dependencies) again? How much will it make Haskell migrations even harder? Maybe I’m too worried here, but I would not say that we are doing well enough to add further burdens and complications to our task of maintaining Haskell in Debian. If we had managed to get all libraries sorted out for GHC-7.8 in, say, with 2 to 3 weeks that’d be different. But that’s not the current state of affairs. In any case, we should concentrate on getting Haskell in shape for testing migration again and work towards getting 7.10 into unstable (see the roadmap mail) before tackling new tasks. Greetings, Joachim > -- Joachim "nomeata" Breitner Debian Developer nomeata@debian.org | ICQ# 74513189 | GPG-Keyid: F0FBF51F JID: nomeata@joachim-breitner.de | http://people.debian.org/~nomeata
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part