On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 2:45 AM, Max Bolingbroke
<batterseapo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On 1 November 2011 09:00, Ketil Malde <ke...@malde.org> wrote:
>> This is where it stranded the last time, IIRC.  That sentiment makes me
>> a bit uneasy; so you are the official maintainer of a package on
>> Hackage, but you do not want to hear about it when it fails to compile?
>
> Don't forget that some packages fail to compile on Hackage even though
> they work fine, because e.g. they depend on a third-party C library
> that is not installed, or depend on some other package that Hackage
> cannot build.

Exactly.  Building on hackage only means that it builds on hackage.
It doesn't actually mean the code works or fails to build on the
actual machines people use.

If we had a community run build farm with appropriate sandboxing and
people could test their builds there that would be amazing, but that's
not the same as checking the build on the hackage machine.

Jason

_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe

Reply via email to