I'm willing to help in the process, if some directions were given to me on how to tackle this problem.
In any case, for me is seems fine to have a dependency from cabal to ghc, the only problem is the converse: ghc depending on cabal. Is this right? 2013/9/6 Herbert Valerio Riedel <h...@gnu.org> > On 2013-09-06 at 15:13:58 +0200, Yuri de Wit wrote: > > I spent some time looking into the touch points between ghc and cabal in > > the past, and the first oddity i saw was a direct dependency from ghc to > > the cabal sources. After taking a closer look it seems that ghc shares > some > > common, low level modules with cabal that didnt seem to justify the whole > > dependency. > > > > The right solution, imho, is to review these dependencies and move the > low > > level ones out into a separate package that is shared by both ghc and > cabal > > and that will rarely change. The direct side effect of this is that ghc > > would not be tied directly to a specific cabal version and you would > > not have to deal with this issue. > > [...] > > fyi, a similiar/related discussion took place few months ago on ghc-devs: > > http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-devs/2013-March/000800.html > > hth, > hvr > > _______________________________________________ > Haskell-Cafe mailing list > Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe >
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
