[Haskell-cafe] Hackage and HaXml situation
jgoerzen at complete.org
Thu Sep 18 19:12:00 EDT 2008
Marc Weber wrote:
> In your particular problem there is another way:
> Ask the distributors to ship both HaXmL versions..
> (Most systems will install one only by default (an update supersedes the
> older one :-( ) But most distributions do let you install two or more
> versions (?)
Yes, most distributions package only one at a time, and yes most could
package more than one. Perhaps that would even work with HaXml.
1) There is still significant end-user confusion
2) This approach doesn't scale once we start thinking of more packages
> I think the way to go is beeing able to represent all the work you've
> I'd like to add a pointer to vxml on hackage. But it's still way to
> unstable for a release.
See, I don't think that Hackage should discourage posting unstable code
-- just discourage posting code that is less stable than the previous
I think there is very little code too unstable for release! Release
early, release often. I wrote my first ever Xlib client in C the other
day. It's up at git://git.complete.org/ledmon. My first ever patches
to xmobar are up at http://darcs.complete.org/xmobar. Don't let
unstable scare you off from releasing.
> How would branches look like?
> We no longer have
> But each version has a set of children and a set of parents (merges) ?
Simplest way to do this would be to define a boolean flag: "stable" or
"unstable". Similarities to Debian here.
More complex, you could let authors define branches. The default branch
is presented, well, by default. Others are visible. Similarities to
I don't know that this has to be terribly complex. Just something to
get us out of the current situation and prevent it from happening again.
More information about the Haskell-Cafe