I strongly disagree. "Cabal and Cabal-syntax" and cabal-install stuff
are separate. Would you suggest stack to be a core library too? It
heavily relies on Cabal/-syntax (and hackage-security).
In my opinion, the development of Cabal-the-library and cabal-install
should perfectly be in separate repositories. As far as I can tell. The
only thing holding that down is a kitchen-sink test-suite.
It's not uncommon that people thinking only about cabal-install make
suboptimal design decisions for Cabal-the-library. It's a library used
much more than just in cabal-install.
- Oleg
On 7.11.2024 23.41, Mikolaj Konarski wrote:
Hi Andrew,
We discussed this on the list and on today's cabal devs
meeting and we are grateful for the proposal and we don't
only accept it, but we'd like to ask you to consider all
cabal packages (`Cabal`, `Cabal-syntax`, `cabal-install`
and `cabal-install-solver`) as core packages. They don't
really make much sense without each other and while
only two of them are GHC boot packages, if I'm not mistaken,
we posit they are all core packages of the Haskell ecosystem.
Cheers,
Mikolaj
On Thu, Nov 7, 2024 at 12:11 AM Andrew Lelechenko
<andrew.leleche...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Mikolaj,
Just a gentle ping, did you come to a conclusion on this?
(I’m not on cabal-devel mail list)
Best regards,
Andrew
On 30 Oct 2024, at 09:03, Mikolaj Konarski <miko...@well-typed.com> wrote:
In fact, I'm not sure you are on the cabal-devel list, so I should
have added you to CC of this email.
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Mikolaj Konarski <miko...@well-typed.com>
Date: Wed, Oct 30, 2024 at 9:59 AM
Subject: Fwd: Is Cabal a core library?
To: <cabal-devel@haskell.org>
Andrew, thank you for your kind offer.
Let me forward this to other Cabal developers.
Best regards,
Mikolaj
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Andrew Lelechenko <andrew.leleche...@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Oct 30, 2024 at 1:50 AM
Subject: Is Cabal a core library?
To: Mikolaj Konarski <miko...@well-typed.com>, Hécate <hec...@glitchbra.in>
Hi Mikolaj and Hecate,
There is a push to consolidate notions of boot (= needed to build GHC)
and core (= under CLC aegis) libraries, so that critical parts of
Haskell ecosystem are more resilient. How do you feel about
designating `Cabal` and `Cabal-syntax` as core packages?
While at the moment Cabal has a very healthy team (thanks a ton for
your work!), there were moments in Cabal history when things were
drastically different. So having an additional safety net, such that
CLC is able to provide additional / emergency maintenance, could be
helpful in future.
Designating a library as a core package does not impose much change on
day-to-day operations. CLC does not interfere with daily development
of Core Libraries as long as appointed maintainers keep them in an
appropriate shape and support healthy communication with contributors.
You can find the full policy at
https://github.com/haskell/core-libraries-committee?tab=readme-ov-file#core-libraries
(Feel free to forward to other Cabal developers)
Best regards,
Andrew
_______________________________________________
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
