Bug#275069: [Debian-haskell] Bug#275069: ITP: haskell-cabal -- Haskell Common Architecture for Building Applications and Libraries
On Tue, 5 Oct 2004 22:43:20 -0500, John Goerzen <jgoerzen@complete.org> wrote:
> On Tuesday 05 October 2004 6:40 pm, Isaac Jones wrote:
> > On Tue, 05 Oct 2004 13:08:42 -0500, John Goerzen
> <jgoerzen@complete.org> wrote:
> > > Package: wnpp
> > > Severity: wishlist
> > >
> > > * Package name : haskell-cabal
> >
> > I think I would prefer to maintain this package, if you don't mind.
>
> No problem. I just wanted to make sure it is in sid.
>
> I have made uploads already for the source package that generates a
> binary package for ghc6.
Are you saying you already uploaded it to sid?
> I have added all the hooks necessary for it
> to build ghc5 and also fixed some places in the source where it was
> incompatible with ghc5, but there is a bug relating to subdirectories
> in the ./setup build support for ghc5 that prevents that build from
> working. Also, I fixed postinst and prerm, modified the packages to
> put the libraries in the locations mandated by the Debian haskell
> policy (or as close as possible, at least), modified the build-deps and
> deps for same, added copyright text, etc.
Can you please send me patches via darcs? Brief instructions for
doing so are here (please send patches to ijones@syntaxpolice.org):
http://www.haskell.org/cabal/code.html
> nhc98 support should also be fairly easily added, and Hugs too if the
> source is compatible with it.
>
> So let me know when you want to take it over. If the answer is "now",
Yep.
> please contact me for my diff.gz.
Actually, what I'd prefer to do is to receive patches via darcs and
integrate them into the upstream source as it is now.
> > I'm not sure it's ready to enter Debian yet... the interface isn't
> > finalized, so I'd like to keep it out of testing.
>
> So far, it is likely to be used only as a Build-Dep in Debian, which
> means it's an internal problem for us to sort out (not bothering end
> users).
>
> But if it is kept out of testing, then there goes MissingH, Hunit, and
> HSQL -- unless those are all converted to using something else like
> hmake, which seems like a waste of time since the world is
> standardizing on Cabal.
>
> Interfaces have changed before. We can handle it.
It's going to slow development of Cabal of I have to worry about
breaking packages in testing. I definitely want things like HUnit and
WASH to make it into testing, but the best way to do that, IMO, is to
speed up Cabal development, and I very much appreciate your efforts
there. There's a TODO list in the source if you want to know our
priorities.
It might also be good for someone on the Cabal team to be a
comaintainer on packages that depend on it, so when we break the
compatibility layer, we can upload Cabal and dependencies at the same
time.
Thanks a lot for your work. I'm excited to see Cabal more widely
used, and most especially in support of packaging for Debian. That
was the primary motivation for writing it. Let's get Cabal to 1.0 so
I can feel good about it moving into testing.
And if you haven't played with darcs yet, check it out. I think
you'll appreciate how natural it is to send patches.
peace,
isaac
Reply to: