> > [...] But the major part would be the negotiations with MTL
> users. [...]
>
> Well, it's a bit hard to negotiate with an unknown user base.
> I propose to
> make the new monad package the default (= auto package) in
> the next GHC release,
> but at the same time keeping the old mtl package (which would
> be non-auto then)
> for people who still want it. Or are there technical problems
> with this approach?
> Hmmm, Hugs has no package concept...
We're not really ready to be able to do this yet. While it's almost
certainly possible to have two packages with overlapping modules, there
are no safeguards in place to make sure that nothing goes wrong. It'll
probably be a nightmare. If one of the packages is auto, that's likely
to make things worse.
For this to work, the package system needs to know which packages are
mutually exclusive. This is something that I think we proposed as part
of our package revamp a while ago: if you want to have several versions
of a package installed, then certainly they need to be mutually
exclusive, and if one of them is marked "auto" then requesting a
conflicting package should disable the auto bit.
Cheers,
Simon
_______________________________________________
Cvs-libraries mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-libraries
