On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 4:23 PM, Troy Sankey <sankey...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hm, I should have been following a stackage LTS. Maybe I wouldn't need > to relax any dependency versions. I also wonder if I could have avoided > some discrepancies between hackage and released .cabal files regarding > dependency versions (there are quite a few [0]).
As far as I know in the past NIX was aggressively removing upper version constraints, but this seems to have led to problems and they changed policy: http://lists.science.uu.nl/pipermail/nix-dev/2015-January/015608.html Having a set of compatible packages is one of the key Stackage goals https://github.com/fpco/stackage/blob/master/MAINTAINERS.md#adding-a-package If the project takes traction (as it seems) this problem should disappear. I would consider a discrepancy between a cabal file on Hackage and the actual cabal file included in a tar archive a bug. It may be helpful to report it to the author. Regards, Fede [...] > [0] > https://github.com/pwnage101/guix/blob/00cc2021d9f3019c8dc69383ff2038eb54d1ba5a/gnu/packages/haskell.scm#L1375 > https://github.com/pwnage101/guix/blob/00cc2021d9f3019c8dc69383ff2038eb54d1ba5a/gnu/packages/haskell.scm#L1404 > https://github.com/pwnage101/guix/blob/00cc2021d9f3019c8dc69383ff2038eb54d1ba5a/gnu/packages/haskell.scm#L1537 > https://github.com/pwnage101/guix/blob/00cc2021d9f3019c8dc69383ff2038eb54d1ba5a/gnu/packages/haskell.scm#L1594 > https://github.com/pwnage101/guix/blob/00cc2021d9f3019c8dc69383ff2038eb54d1ba5a/gnu/packages/haskell.scm#L1944 > https://github.com/pwnage101/guix/blob/00cc2021d9f3019c8dc69383ff2038eb54d1ba5a/gnu/packages/haskell.scm#L1987 > https://github.com/pwnage101/guix/blob/00cc2021d9f3019c8dc69383ff2038eb54d1ba5a/gnu/packages/haskell.scm#L2018 > https://github.com/pwnage101/guix/blob/00cc2021d9f3019c8dc69383ff2038eb54d1ba5a/gnu/packages/haskell.scm#L5902 > https://github.com/pwnage101/guix/blob/00cc2021d9f3019c8dc69383ff2038eb54d1ba5a/gnu/packages/haskell.scm#L8793