I wrote: >> So it's moot for this release. But in principle, what would >> have been the problem with having the platform installers >> ship with the 1.20 executable, or build the 1.20 executable >> in a sandbox for installers that build it, and then still ship >> with Cabal-1.18. in the libraries?
Ivan Lazar Miljenovic wrote: > Linux distros that don't use pre-built binaries, especially > source-based ones where having cabal-install-1.2 would require > building Cabal-1.20? It would be built only on the machine building the package, and there only inside a sandbox. It would not need to be part of the distro itself. > (Then again, unless it's people learning Haskell and being told to > install the platform, I would imagine that many people on Linux > wouldn't use the platform itself and just install whatever libraries > they want.) Generally, it makes sense for *users* of Haskell - whether beginners or not - to start with the platform. People working on developing the Haskell ecosystem might start with a more recent GHC, but even then the platform often makes sense as a default starting point. >> On a related note: are we sure that we want cabal-install >> to print the upgrade message whenever a newer version >> is available on hackage? > Maybe have that as a config option? It's still helpful for people that > built cabal-install themselves and know what they're doing? Makes sense. Thanks, Yitz _______________________________________________ Haskell-platform mailing list Haskell-platform@projects.haskell.org http://projects.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-platform
