On 2011/1/10 Peter Simons <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Rémy, > > > I added [ArchPackage] because I thought it was a better type for the > > output of the conversion function (since the output is really a > > PKGBUILD + Maybe an install script), but I didn't use it yet. I'd > > prefer keeping it for the moment. > > you are right. I agree that this type is a good choice to represent the > result of a cabal-to-pkgbuild conversion. > > At the same time, I am a little concerned about the seemingly increasing > amount of dead code in the ArchLinux library. Note that the ArchPackage > type has been added on 2010-10-15, and since then it's been sitting > there unused. Furthermore, note that the export list for PkgBuild.hs > doesn't mention that type. So, not only is it unused, it's actually > impossible to use because the outside world can't access it. > > Clearly, the ArchPackage type is part of an ongoing effort to re-factor > the cabal2pkg function. That is a good idea and I am totally in favor of > it. I would like to suggest, however, that this kind of re-factoring is > performed in a branch and merged into 'master' only after it's complete. > > Does that sound reasonable?
Yes, perfectly reasonable. -- Rémy. _______________________________________________ arch-haskell mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-haskell
