May I hijack this thread to ask about the changes in transformers 0.4 ?

I mean the specific about ErrorT, ListT that have been discussed before. 

Cheers
On Monday, May 12, 2014 4:13:11 PM UTC+2, Gabriel Gonzalez wrote:
>
> There are two issues with using `cabal freeze`: 
>
> 1) It only works if `cabal` succeeds once, but the chance of it 
> succeeding goes down greatly if you remove upper bounds 
> 2) Once you remove upper bounds from a package it makes `cabal` much 
> more likely to fail on a permanent basis.  Adding just one package in 
> the history that has no upper bound means that cabal will always 
> consider that package when it is trying to work around that upper bound, 
> even if it's a really old package. 
>
> Also, if I remember correctly they are adding (or maybe already added) a 
> flag to have `cabal` ignore upper bounds, which I think is the best 
> solution. 
>
> On 05/12/2014 04:46 AM, Danny Navarro wrote: 
> > My intention is not to start a discussion about whether upper limit 
> > bounds is better than not having them (I prefer to not have them 
> > though), but after the hairy process of updating some `pipes` packages 
> > to `transfomers-0.4`, I was wondering if the new `cabal freeze`[1] 
> > feature would cover the use cases for which upper limits are currently 
> > used. 
> > 
> > With cabal freeze we could pin the versions for which we are sure it 
> > builds, while allowing easier upgrades for packages which use the 
> > dependency. This doesn't guarantee that there won't be breakages, but 
> > at least, IMHO, the dependencies of packages with many `pipes` 
> > dependencies will be easier to update. Notice that in practice upper 
> > limits doesn't guarantee flawless builds either. 
> > 
> > [1]: http://blog.johantibell.com/2014/04/announcing-cabal-120.html 
> > 
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Haskell Pipes" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].

Reply via email to