HEADS UP: patches, package versions, and cabal-install
marlowsd at gmail.com
Mon Dec 8 07:38:46 EST 2008
Claus Reinke wrote:
> If packages are patched without any change in version number,
> bad things can happen if one tries to cabal install additional packages
> onto such a patched ghc.
> At the moment, that seems to be the case for array and containers,
> which were adjusted following the syb split, without changes in version
> number (containers also seems to have gained some exports, foldrWithKey
> and the like, again without version bump). Could this please be fixed?
Yes - the policy should be that we bump version numbers according to the
PVP as soon as an API change occurs. However, note that it's not practical
to do this *every* time an API change occurs, we only need to keep the
version number correct with respect to released versions of packages, not
unreleased versions. This is unlikely to cause a problem, though.
Ian - I think this might be different from the policy we agreed before, but
I can't remember where (if anywhere) we wrote it down. The difference is
that we hadn't considered the possibility of people trying to use cabal
install with a an unreleased HEAD build before, but I don't think there's a
good reason why this shouldn't work.
More information about the Cvs-ghc