On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 10:53 PM, Don Stewart d...@galois.com wrote:
alexander.dunlap:
o pandoc — markdown, reStructuredText, HTML, LaTeX, ConTeXt,
Docbook, OpenDocument, ODT, RTF, MediaWiki, groff
No. Pandoc is too actively developed to go into the HP. It's also much
more of
On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 7:40 AM, Alexander
Dunlapalexander.dun...@gmail.com wrote:
Interface unification would help. Especially network-bytestring seems
to be too ad-hoc for me - it would probably be better to put
ByteString support into the regular Network library
It's my intention to get
On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 11:05 PM, Max Rabkinmax.rab...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 11:56 PM, Magnus Therningmag...@therning.org wrote:
AIUI, on systems with working package managers, HP will be a
metapackage which depends on the appropriate real packages.
Yes, but again, the role
Hello Magnus,
Wednesday, August 5, 2009, 11:37:23 AM, you wrote:
I don't know of any other way either. I just strongly oppose the idea
that HP should take on the role of providing C lib bindings just
because on some platforms it's hard to satisfy the C dependencies.
those some platfroms are
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 8:59 AM, Bulat
Ziganshinbulat.zigans...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello Magnus,
Wednesday, August 5, 2009, 11:37:23 AM, you wrote:
I don't know of any other way either. I just strongly oppose the idea
that HP should take on the role of providing C lib bindings just
because on
I agree with most of Alexander's many thoughtful comments
about Don's list of potential additions to HP. But I
disagree about pandoc.
Alexander Dunlap wrote:
No. Pandoc is too actively developed to go into the HP.
It depends on the nature of the development. If the
API is currently very
Tom Tobin wrote:
As I understand it, Pandoc is entirely under the GPL (not LGPL).
Oh. That would be an issue, yes. Too bad.
Thanks,
Yitz
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Tom == Tom Tobin korp...@korpios.com writes:
Tom As I understand it, Pandoc is entirely under the GPL (not
Tom LGPL). I'd be very wary of accepting a GPL'd library as a
I'd be very upset if pandoc weren't blessed.
Tom blessed standard library, since it would be completely
Tom
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 10:19 AM, Colin Paul
Adamsco...@colina.demon.co.uk wrote:
Just because a library is blessed, doesn't mean you have to use it.
Then I'm not sure I understand the point of blessing it in a set of
libraries that saves you the task of picking and choosing the best
Haskell
Tom == Tom Tobin korp...@korpios.com writes:
This can surely be tackled by cabal, as it already has the
license information.
Tom I don't see this as a real solution; why would a package be
It should be done anyway, irrespective of the platform.
Tom added to the platform in
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Colin Paul
Adamsco...@colina.demon.co.uk wrote:
Tom == Tom Tobin korp...@korpios.com writes:
This can surely be tackled by cabal, as it already has the
license information.
Tom I don't see this as a real solution; why would a package be
It should
Tom is exactly right here. GPL is the kiss of death in the commercial
world. Haskell Platform exists in part to encourage industry use of
Haskell -- and to encourage braindead use of blessed libraries. GPL
libraries have no place in HP.
Regards,
John A. De Goes
N-Brain, Inc.
The
On Wed, 5 Aug 2009 11:03:55 -0500
Tom Tobin korp...@korpios.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Colin Paul
Adamsco...@colina.demon.co.uk wrote:
Tom == Tom Tobin korp...@korpios.com writes:
This can surely be tackled by cabal, as it already has the
license information.
And even if you don't agree with that, it would likely lead to
accidental use of GPL software in proprietary software, which is not a
good thing.
--
Robin
On Wed, 5 Aug 2009 09:33:34 -0700
John A. De Goes j...@n-brain.net wrote:
Tom is exactly right here. GPL is the kiss of death in the
bulat.ziganshin:
Hello Magnus,
Wednesday, August 5, 2009, 11:37:23 AM, you wrote:
I don't know of any other way either. I just strongly oppose the idea
that HP should take on the role of providing C lib bindings just
because on some platforms it's hard to satisfy the C dependencies.
gale:
Other batteries included platforms contain
various tools for processing markup that are
far less general than pandoc. This is a place
where Haskell can shine.
So yes, pandoc should definitely be included
in the platform. All that said, though, I will
certainly agree that it is not
+++ Don Stewart [Aug 03 09 22:53 ]:
alexander.dunlap:
o pandoc — markdown, reStructuredText, HTML, LaTeX, ConTeXt,
Docbook, OpenDocument, ODT, RTF, MediaWiki, groff
No. Pandoc is too actively developed to go into the HP. It's also much
more of an end-user application than a
On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 4:54 PM, John MacFarlanej...@berkeley.edu wrote:
[..]
In this connection, I want to make a general point about the HP:
In a way, it doesn't matter so much which additional pure Haskell
libraries it includes, because once you have cabal install, you can get
anything
On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 6:13 PM, Magnus Therningmag...@therning.org wrote:
AFAIU the plan is to separate GHC and its platform packages, so in
the future it might not be that easy to get to the point where you
_can_ run 'cabal install'.
Absolutely not. The point of HP is to make the path from
Hello John,
Tuesday, August 4, 2009, 7:54:14 PM, you wrote:
methods other than Deflate. A better solution, perhaps, would be a
binding to libzip.
it's hard to find feature list for libzip, but i suggest to look into
7zip library support. it supports lot of archive formats, including
zip, rar,
On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 10:40 PM, Alexander Dunlap
alexander.dun...@gmail.com wrote:
o unicode text [text] [text-icu] — packed, unicode text
This is essential, although I don't know if it is stable enough for
the platform (?).
I'm doing some cleaning up of the APIs at the moment
Max Rabkin wrote:
On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 6:13 PM, Magnus Therningmag...@therning.org wrote:
AFAIU the plan is to separate GHC and its platform packages, so in
the future it might not be that easy to get to the point where you
_can_ run 'cabal install'.
Absolutely not. The point of HP is to
On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 11:56 PM, Magnus Therningmag...@therning.org wrote:
AIUI, on systems with working package managers, HP will be a
metapackage which depends on the appropriate real packages.
Yes, but again, the role of HP shouldn't be to limit the pain of installing
bindings to C
On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 4:44 PM, Don Stewartd...@galois.com wrote:
Following Simon M's advice, I look over the typical batteries
categories, using Python as input:
http://docs.python.org/library/index.html
The following things were missing from the current Platform. There are many.
How
alexander.dunlap:
o pandoc — markdown, reStructuredText, HTML, LaTeX, ConTeXt,
Docbook, OpenDocument, ODT, RTF, MediaWiki, groff
No. Pandoc is too actively developed to go into the HP. It's also much
more of an end-user application than a standard library - it's
applications are
25 matches
Mail list logo
