Brainstorming package compatibility problem

[Bulat Ziganshin]

i've forwarded this message from libraries list because i think it's very
important topic for Haskell growth. please answer only to libraries at haskell.org


This is a forwarded message
From: Simon Marlow <simonmarhaskell at gmail.com>
===8<==============Original message text===============
Duncan and I have started a wiki page to collect proposals for ways to 
avoid or alleviate the pain from future package reorganisations.

http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/PackageCompatibility

It's been helpful for me to write all this down, the issues seem much 
clearer.  However, I don't see an obviously best solution.  For me proposal 
4.2 (see the wiki page) looks the most promising, but it doesn't provide 
complete backwards compatibility, so I imagine there will be people who 
disagree.

Please read the page.  Fix problems, add rationale, add proposals if you 
have any that are substantially different from those already there.  For 
general discussion just reply to this message (replies directed to 
libraries at haskell.org).

Cheers,
        Simon

_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
Libraries at haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries

===8<===========End of original message text===========



-- 
Best regards,
 Bulat                            mailto:Bulat.Ziganshin at gmail.com