[Haskell-cafe] Re: Poll: Do you need to be able to build darcs from source on GHC 6.6?
Juliusz Chroboczek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No. That was just a way of pointing out that other revision control systems do not have such complex build dependencies. *cough* % export USE=doc gtk iconv perl subversion bash-completion cgi curl cvs emacs mozsha1 ppcsha1 threads tk vim-syntax webdav xinetd % emerge git --emptytree -p |wc -l 381 % export USE=-doc gtk iconv perl subversion bash-completion cgi curl cvs emacs mozsha1 ppcsha1 threads tk vim-syntax webdav xinetd % emerge git --emptytree -p |wc -l 329 % export USE=-doc -gtk -iconv -perl -subversion -bash-completion -cgi -curl -cvs -emacs -mozsha1 -ppcsha1 -threads -tk -vim-syntax -webdav -xinetd emerge git --emptytree -p |wc -l % emerge git --emptytree -p |wc -l 57 % USE=doc emerge darcs --emptytree -p | wc -l 329 (that's mostly because stuff like latex pulls the whole of x11 and gtk with my current settings... I can't be arsed to figure all of that out right now) % USE=-doc emerge darcs --emptytree -p | wc -l 79 Now you can say that A severely crippled version of git has less source dependencies, but don't ever claim that the build dependencies are less _complex_. 17 package-specific use flags are rather extreme. -- (c) this sig last receiving data processing entity. Inspect headers for copyright history. All rights reserved. Copying, hiring, renting, performance and/or quoting of this signature prohibited. ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
[Haskell-cafe] Re: Poll: Do you need to be able to build darcs from source on GHC 6.6?
Duncan Coutts [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'd just like to point out (again ;-) ) than it's not that hard to support older platforms. The only constraint is that people not squeal at the sight of bundled code. The bundling can be done in such a way that it's not a maintenance burden, indeed it can remove the need to maintain internal equivalents of external libs. For example for an external package foo, we could put the latest stable version of it in lib/foo and in the .cabal file say something like: As the Debian packager, including convenience copies of build dependency libraries in the stable tarballs increases my workload because - Debian Policy requires that I not use them. If the ./configure prefers the convenience copies over the ones found on the system, that means I have to write extra code in debian/rules to force the use of the system copies. - Debian Policy requires that all files in the source tarball -- even libraries that I don't actually compile against -- have their copyright and license information declared in debian/copyright. This means that even if everybody knows libfoo is GPL, I have to audit the convenience copy to make sure that every significant work (read: file) in the convenience copy has a clear license declaration to that effect, and to document any exceptions. Alternatively, I can create my own stable tarball of darcs by unpacking the one Eric makes, removing the convenience copies, and then re-tarring it. But this is fiddly and normally only done when the upstream tarball contains work that Debian won't or can't (legally) distribute. Therefore while I understand the argument for convenience copies, I'd be obliged if they were kept to a minimum. ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
[Haskell-cafe] Re: Poll: Do you need to be able to build darcs from source on GHC 6.6?
Jason Dagit [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Debian is nice in some ways and it's really great that stable lives up to its name, but I am sad that Debian has such old software for so long. Those two properties are strongly correlated. There is backports.org for cases where you want to cherry-pick a handful of packages for which stability is less important than newness. Of course, GHC 6.8 isn't on backports.org at present. That means either it's non-trivial to backport, or nobody has volunteered the time. ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
[Haskell-cafe] Re: Poll: Do you need to be able to build darcs from source on GHC 6.6?
David Roundy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 12:11:22PM +1100, Trent W. Buck wrote: Thus I think the version/upgrade matrix is handy so we can plan/schedule when it is safe to drop support. In an ideal world, we just make sure it builds with the latest tools, and let the users of stable distros worry about telling us if it breaks against whatever versions they care about. No, in the idea world we'd try to be supportive of our contributors and maintainers by not requiring that they install the latest tools. No, in the ideal world bleeding edge is stable. -- (c) this sig last receiving data processing entity. Inspect headers for copyright history. All rights reserved. Copying, hiring, renting, performance and/or quoting of this signature prohibited. ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
[Haskell-cafe] Re: Poll: Do you need to be able to build darcs from source on GHC 6.6?
Trent W. Buck [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 12:39:28PM +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: Trent W. Buck writes: In an ideal world, we just make sure it builds with the latest tools, and let the users of stable distros worry about telling us if it breaks against whatever versions they care about. This is very disappointing coming from (some) developers of *version control software*! You'd think they, of all software developers, would be sympathetic to the need to, well, control versions! Let me clarify that the above are my *personal* opinions, and I'm not really involved in the Darcs Haskell code -- just the surrounding build and documentation infrastructure. I'm speaking more from my role as a Debian maintainer and user than as a member of the Darcs comunity. Actually, even more than that I'm speaking as someone who for years tried to keep shell scripts portable and POSIX clean and working even on ten-year-old versions of Solaris... before deciding that I was investing way too much time testing on those systems considering approximately zero of my users ran them. So I said fuck it, I'll use bash and assume GNU coreutils, and if it breaks on someone's system, they'll tell me. ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
