On 02/06/2012 09:45 AM, Magnus Therning wrote:
On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 21:18, Vesa Kaihlavirta<[email protected]> wrote:
On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 7:08 PM, Magnus Therning<[email protected]> wrote:
This was mainly directed to the Arch Devs on the list, and especially
Vesa since he's putting in most of the work on GHC as found in
[extra].
We've already discussed the question of whether we should keep HP in
Arch. *I* think there was clear what the favoured route ahead was,
but in the end it's the Arch Devs who decide. I don't like the
current situation (outdated GHC and outdated HP), so a decision would
be much welcome then the work on catching up can begin.
Yeah, I noticed 7.4.1's release just now.
The question of HP and Arch was left in a limbo the last time, I feel.
The reason I started pondering about dropping HP earlier was that
there seemed to be no progress on it with regards to 7.2. Then it was
pointed out that 7.2 was sort of an unstable upstream release, so that
was the reason for HP not going with it.
So now I'm not so certain anymore about dropping it. We could again
wait for a while until HP catches up (it should be relatively fast
this time, since 7.4 is supposedly a real stable release) or just drop
it and go to 7.4.1 asap (and probably face some breakage). What do you
people think?
Drop HP. The main reason is that the goals of HP are opposite the
goals of ArchLinux.
Yes, so far, users of this list clearly prefer to drop HP and move to
7.4. (6 responses). One would prefer to stay with 7.0. At least 2 people
of this list are OK if the upgrade to 7.4 means dropping packages
provided that at least ghc itself and cabal-install are available.
Peter.
_______________________________________________
arch-haskell mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-haskell
