Is there a reason why our importers do not use their ecosystem's native
packaging software libraries? For example, I just spent a good while
updating and fixing our Haskell importers and while they do now seem
quite reliable there are still some quirks in the custom parser. The
Cabal package description format is implementation defined and full of
compatibility switches, so I would expect it to be much easier to
implement and maintain a Haskell program that uses the Cabal library to
parse package descriptions into s-expressions for the rest of the
importer.

I suppose other languages would have a similar library since they need
to work with those package definitions too. Yet no importer seems to do
anything like that. Is this just because many package indices provide a
easy to parse json description or is there a technical/policy limitation?

- Saku

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to