Moving this to the mailing list, because this is turning into a discussion. :-)
On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 02:29:13PM -0700, Profpatsch wrote: > I see. > > I don’t understand how getting a coherent set of package version is > possible manually by hand, though. I’d assume that’s exactly the > kind of things where computers excel. Have you looked at > [stackage](http://www.stackage.org/)? It is possible, but it's a lot of work. Which is exactly why I started working on `cblrepo` in the first place. `cblrepo` does check that dependencies are satisfied, and it reports when they are not. What it doesn't do though is automatically satisfy the missing dependencies. I simply haven't found a need for that. (Patches are welcome, though.) I have looked at stackage. AFAIU it is basically a place to host a subset of Hackage (plus the possibility to patch packages). If I've understood that correctly it means stackage is of VERY limited use to us in maintain Arch Haskell. /M -- Magnus Therning OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4 email: mag...@therning.org jabber: mag...@therning.org twitter: magthe http://therning.org/magnus Most software today is very much like an Egyptian pyramid with millions of bricks piled on top of each other, with no structural integrity, but just done by brute force and thousands of slaves. -- Alan Kay
pgpkYLhYbvpjP.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ arch-haskell mailing list arch-haskell@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-haskell
