duncan.coutts:
> On Wed, 2008-08-27 at 12:53 -0700, Don Stewart wrote:
> 
> > A draft "meta package" for the platform is here,
> > 
> >     http://code.haskell.org/haskell-platform/haskell-platform.cabal
> > 
> > This would allow us to:
> > 
> >     cabal install haskell-platform
> > 
> > and use cabal to track dependencies.
> 
> This now works. The Cabal lib update that I released yesterday allows us
> to use meta-packages. The cabal-install release I did yesterday includes
> the detailed build logging and reporting. The next part is the server.
> 
> > The question is on what to include. I'd say, start with the current
> > extra libs, and throw in the 5 most popular others (say, Data.Binary,
> > an XML library, a JSON library, and some other parsers).
> 
> I've just updated the haskell-platform package with the minimal list
> from here:
> http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/Haskell_Platform/Batteries_Included
> 
> which is the classic extra libs (less ObjectIO which never used to be
> built anyway) and cabal-install and its two deps, zlib and HTTP.
> 
> Personally I'd hold off on the rest. Deciding between the multitude of
> xml libs is something we need to involve the community on. We've yet to
> establish the way in which new packages join. I think those criteria
> need to be published and not just the whim of the inner Haskell Cabal.
> Again, GNOME is the model to follow here. They've got a reasonable and
> open decision making process for proposing new packages.

Right, the next step is to define the decision filter that will
allow new packages to be added to the haskell-platform meta package.
The other infrastructure is in place.

-- Don

_______________________________________________
Cvs-ghc mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ghc

Reply via email to