On Sat, Oct 18, 2008 at 06:02:15AM -0700, Eric Kow wrote: > It seems we all agree that /some/ form of Cabalisation is a good thing to have > in the official darcs repository. This is what I believe to be the form of > cabalisation that everybody can live with.
I think this is an overstatement. I'd still rather keep packaging out of the official darcs repository on the whole. I know that we do have a darcs.spec.in file in release/, but the debian stuff has been removed, and in release/ it's out of the way. Perhaps we could put the darcs.cabal in the same place? We don't have a gentoo ebuild in the official darcs repository, and I don't see a strong reason why we should add one. Why is cabal any different? > With these patches, cabal configure and cabal build configure and build darcs > respectively using franchise as the build method. This allows us to use > franchise's checking for C libraries, while providing metadata to integrate > with > cabal-install and to help automatic distro packaging tools. The package > dependency information is on a purely advisory basis; it is ignored by > franchise. I'd rather see changes move into darcs in a gradual, incremental manner. I'm likely to accept a reasonable darcs.cabal file, but please make it a single patch. -- David Roundy http://www.darcs.net _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
