On Wed Apr 17, 2024 at 7:26 PM BST, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > To be fair, I _was_ upset (not with Jonathan, but) earlier in this > thread, which makes it harder to err on the side of a mistake when I > write something that can be read as being sarcastic.
I would be upset too if my packages were repeatedly hijacked. > Sorry, Jonathan, for being difficult to read here. No problem: Sorry for lapsing in assuming good faith on my part. WRT Haskell and the monorepo, I've just done a bit of digging to try and remind myself why it was necessary, and I've not found a satisfactory answer. Perhaps there isn't one! [1] says it's "easier to update them in bulk" which, in isolation, I personally don't think is sufficient for the trade-off. I've just noticed that you upload Pandoc, and it (thankfully) is in an individual repo. You don't build a library package, perhaps that's relevant. I haven't traced the history that results in there being a separate haskell-pandoc source package yet. [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-haskell/2024/02/msg00001.html [2] https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/haskell-hakyll -- Please do not CC me for listmail. 👱🏻 Jonathan Dowland ✎ j...@debian.org 🔗 https://jmtd.net
