that’s great! My worry is not so much whether it is possible to package
Am Mittwoch, den 27.05.2015, 15:39 -0700 schrieb David Fox:
> On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 1:04 PM, Joachim Breitner <email@example.com>
> Also, it opens a new can of worm: Do we have to provide
> 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.
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?