Hi, Am Dienstag, den 11.09.2012, 20:50 +0900 schrieb Kiwamu Okabe: > On Sun, Sep 9, 2012 at 6:43 PM, Joachim Breitner <nome...@debian.org> wrote: > >> But I am so happy, if you dput my old version hoogle package to sid when > >> ready. > > > > that is an excellent idea. Adding new packages to sid does not affect > > the release in any way. If you prepare a hoogle package that builds > > against the existing and unchanged packages in sid, I’ll upload it. > > Haskell-hoogle package is ready for upload. > > http://anonscm.debian.org/darcs/pkg-haskell/haskell-hoogle/ > > Joachim (or someone), could you dput it to sid?
I see you added a .hs file to the package that is run using runhaskell. Why are you not compiling this at build time and ship it as a binary? Seems to be more efficient, reduces dependencies (ok, few people will install hoogle without ghc :-)) and enables hoogle on architectures without GHCi. How useful are the lib-hoogle-* packages? Do you expect any users of the library? I improved the description of the hoogle package. Why does it depend on haskell-platform? Can’t I use it to just search the packages that I happen to have installed? Have you tested your update-hoogle script on a system with no libghc-*-doc package installed (I expect at least an ugly error). Is there any point in keeping the *.txt and *.hoo files in /var/lib/hoogle/databases after a update_hoogle run? It seems, at a first glance, that /var/lib/hoogle/databases/default.hoo is enough. I did not yet test the cgi interface. I’d also welcome if other people from DHG would review this non-trivial package. Greetings, Joachim -- Joachim "nomeata" Breitner Debian Developer nome...@debian.org | ICQ# 74513189 | GPG-Keyid: 4743206C JID: nome...@joachim-breitner.de | http://people.debian.org/~nomeata
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
