I also thought about it recently. IIRC ghc can already deal with any number of stacked package dbs; we only need to expose this somehow through cabal.
On 22/03/15 11:52, Herbert Valerio Riedel wrote: > On 2015-03-21 at 18:54:26 +0100, Mark Lentczner wrote: > > [...] > >> The Platform arose in an era before sandboxes and before curated library >> sets like Stackage and LTS. Last time we set direction was several years >> ago. These new features and development have clearly changed the landscape >> for use to reconsider what to do. > > [...] > >> Thoughts? > > My biggest complaint about the current HP is that it pollutes the global > package database with additional packages which leak into `cabal > sandbox`es. This causes `cabal sandbox` to provide quite different > sandbox environments for HP environments compared to a non-HP > environment without those additional packages pre-installed. > > Currently GHC/Cabal knows about a global package db and a user package > db (the user pkg db is is what gets replaced/shadowed by cabal > sandboxes). Maybe we need a 3rd package db sitting between the global > and the user package db that interacts better with cabal sandboxes? > > Cheers, > hvr > _______________________________________________ > Libraries mailing list > librar...@haskell.org > http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries > _______________________________________________ Haskell-platform mailing list Haskell-platform@projects.haskell.org http://projects.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-platform
