On 2015-03-25 at 06:52:22 +0100, Mark Lentczner wrote: > On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 8:20 PM, Gershom B <gersh...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> install Yesod, or GHCJS, or Yesod and then GHCJS, and then some package >> with an API binding for some webservice which has not been updated in two >> years and requires an old version of time, and then maybe a GUI toolkit and >> of course lens. > > That sounds like a recipe for Cabal Hell, Platform or not!
Regardless of the hellish issue, Gershom's comment indirectly highlights of one thing where I'm wondering if the HP's growth isn't bounded by diversity: There are some areas which I'd expected to some degree in a batteries-included platform, where the Haskell ecosystem has diverged into popular but distinct package-sub-ecosystems (which all have their respective communities/followers), such as HTTP-serving (Yesod/Snap/Happstack/...), or which lens-abstraction to use, or at the more fundamental level, even the streaming abstraction (pipes/conduit/io-streams/machines/...) doesn't seem to have a clearly recommended and agreed upon representative. Also, to this day we don't have any TLS library support in the platform, which also is subject to debate of which crypto-library to use (and there's also the question whether to use OpenSSL via FFI or a native TLS reimpl). So the platform-included `HTTP` package is not even able to access `https://` URLs which is quite sad, as this also holds back `cabal-install`'s ability to access `https://`-only repositories. So, where do you see the platform's growth for those packages/areas where you'll probably not get a reasonable majority consensus for picking a specific package? Cheers, hvr _______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs