That _does_ look simpler! However, I think there are multiple efforts underway towards the nix-style stuff. We had a GSoC on that for example. And in that workflow, if it all works out properly, then we end up with a situation where since the general-user-db has no conflicts, then sandboxes are the tools that become generally not required.
So I would be quite hesitant about moving things in the other direction... -g On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 1:16 PM, Bardur Arantsson <s...@scientician.net> wrote: > Hi all, > > So, I was feeling a bit frustrated about the complexity of the Cabal > sandbox code, and when I get frustrated I start deleting things... > > Just for funzies I tried deleting all the obvious non-sandbox code > in cabal-install, and here's the result: > > > https://github.com/BardurArantsson/cabal/commit/27aa116cc0ab3c824bd80c175ecbe51955dd9271 > > As you can see it means the removal of 218 lines, but most importantly > IMO it drastically simplifies the code in some places, notably > loadConfigOrSandboxConfig (funnily enough) becomes trivial and > classifyPackageEnvironment disappears (conincidence? I think not.). I'm > sure there are quite a few other things that could also be removed. I've > left a few notes sprinkled in the code marked by XXX. > > Obviously, this isn't mergeable as-is[1] and I mostly did it for a lark, > but what do you guys think? Is this something that could/should be > pursued further? I seem to recall hearing some rumblings that some > people really wanted cabal-install to be sandbox-only. I think this > little Proof of Concept shows that it would be beneficial at least from > a code complexity/maintenance perspective. > > (I certainly know that I've been getting really frustrated trying to > implement #2810 because the code is incredibly *gnarly* because it has > to account for a lot of combinations of things, and this might be a good > way to try to reverse the tide of option-itis.) > > Regards, > > /b > > [1] For one thing, there's need to be some sort of deprecation period of > non-sandbox mode at the very least. :) > > _______________________________________________ > cabal-devel mailing list > cabal-devel@haskell.org > http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cabal-devel _______________________________________________ cabal-devel mailing list cabal-devel@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cabal-devel
