On 2008.04.08 15:19:12 -0500, John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> scribbled 1.1K characters: > On Mon April 7 2008 9:31:04 pm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > Well, changing the deps at least would be a good idea. > > Right. I've uploaded a new version of hpodder to hackage that will require > the correct HaXml versions.
Great. > > And actually, there is a method - Cabal supports the 'stability:' field, > > but I don't believe it's enforced by cabal-install or anything. > > I think part of the problem is visibility in Hackage. Unless I'm wrong, > Hackage always takes you to the release with the highest version number. > There is no "latest stable version" list and "latest development version" > list, which would be helpful. Something akin to, say, > http://packages.debian.org/hpodder Yes, that's true. There is no good way of doing in Hackage that doesn't involve self-discipline or messing with release schedules. I do have a thought about the 'stability:' field, though. Feel free to weigh in at <http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/hackage/ticket/265>. > > (Personally, I'd update it, not just because of issues like this, but > > because there looked to be a number of changes necessary when I commented > > all the type sigs, and the longer you wait... &etc.) > > The thing is -- I don't want a stable hpodder to jump to a development > version of HaXml. The released version is working just fine, and when there > is a new stable release, I'll update then. XML parsing is quite central to > hpodder. > > -- John Sure, but there are costs to not transitioning just as there are costs to so doing. I was just saying which cost I found preferable. -- gwern JANET Salsa GSA TRANSEC LASINT A/B DJC Al BIOLWPN Xandros
pgpEMIfhjkcHJ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
