On Mon, 2007-11-19 at 21:47 +0100, Radosław Grzanka wrote: > 2007/11/19, brad clawsie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > The problem is that only one person gets to comment on the quality of > > > > a library, the author, who is about the least objective person. > > > > by rolling certain libraries into a base distribution, i was implying > > that there would be more eyeballs focusing on making them > > feature-complete. furthermore, by closely associating these libraries > > into a base distribution, there will be a sense of urgency associated > > with closing major bugs. > > If you look at the stability tag of ghc libraries you will see that a > lot of them are marked as "provisional" (Network.URI for example) or > "experimental" (Control.Monad.Trans). > Although I would love to see some other standard libraries (MaybeT !), > I think that current base should be solid first.
On the other hand, some of these (Control.Monad.Trans) have been "experimental" for several years despite being widely used that whole time... _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
