Duncan Coutts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sat, 2006-08-12 at 03:52 +0200, Marc Weber wrote: >> 1.) >> I know I can use >> Build-Depends: lib == <version>, lib2 < version, lib3 >= >> version >> and so on. >> >> Do you think it would be useful to introducue some notation to indicate >> a "tested with" ? >> >> Reason, purpose: I think its sometimes the case that a author/ mantainer >> is quite busy with other projects and misses that some dependencies >> break things.. If you want to try out you're left with some compiler >> errors and a dependency and have to try out which version works. >> >> I would propose using this syntax: >> lib-1.3 >=1.1 >> to indicate that lib 1.1 is required at leeast and tested with up to >> 1.3.. Cabal might then give a warning if you try to use 1.4 or greater >> "using newer version than tested" or similar.. >> >> What do you think? >> Would this be useful? > > Well there is actually already a "tested-with:" field that you can put > in a .cabal file, however at the moment it refers only to the Haskell > implementation, eg ghc-x.y, hugs-x.y etc not to versions of libraries. > > Yes, I think it's a quite reasonable argument to extend this to include > exact versions of libraries that it has been tested with. > > What do others think?
Sounds OK if someone wants to do it, but I don't think it should be a high priority... I'd rather see support for stuff like this built into HackageDB. I really want to have a "stable", "testing", and "unstable" sections in Hackage where testing and stable have packages that are known to work (or at least build) together. peace, isaac _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
