I notice that in the new Haskell pages, the Platform is definitely not the 
recommended way to go:

Like Richard, I was astonished by this. I always thought that the Haskell 
Platform was the route of choice to install GHC, together with a respectable 
set of libraries.   It’s certainly what I install on a new machine!

Let’s not forget the large but non-vocal set of ill-informed and/or would-be 
users, who want a simple answer to “How do I install GHC?”.  It may be that the 
HP formula needs re-visiting, but I think it’s very important that we continue 
to give a very simple (click here) answer to that question.

Simon

From: Libraries [mailto:libraries-boun...@haskell.org] On Behalf Of Mark 
Lentczner
Sent: 21 March 2015 17:54
To: ghc-d...@haskell.org; Haskell Libraries; 
haskell-platform@projects.haskell.org; 
haskell-infrastruct...@community.galois.com
Subject: wither the Platform

I'm wondering how we are all feeling about the platform these days....

I notice that in the new Haskell pages, the Platform is definitely not the 
recommended way to go: The main download pages suggests the compiler and base 
libraries as the first option - and the text for the Platform (second option) 
pretty much steers folks away from it. Of the per-OS download pages, only the 
Windows version even mentions it.

Does this mean that we don't want to consider continuing with it? It is a lot 
of community effort to put out a Platform release - we shouldn't do it if we 
don't really want it.

That said, I note that the other ways to "officially get" Haskell look, to my 
eye, very ad hoc. Many of the options involve multiple steps, and exactly what 
one is getting isn't clear. It hardly looks like there is now an "official, 
correct" way to setup Haskell.

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.


I don't think the status quo for the Platform is now viable - mostly as 
evidenced by waning interest in maintaining it. I offer several ways we could 
proceed:

1) Abandon the Platform. GHC is release in source and binary form. Other 
package various installers, with more or less things, for various OSes.

2) Slim the Platform. Pare it back to GHC + base + a smaller set of "essential" 
libs + tools. Keeps a consistent build layout and installation mechanism for 
Haskell.

3) Re-conceive the Platform. Take a very minimal install approach, coupled with 
close integration with a curated library set that makes it easy to have a rich 
canonical, stable environment. This was the core idea around my "GPS Haskell" 
thoughts from last September - but there would be much to work out in this 
direction.

Thoughts?

— Mark

_______________________________________________
Haskell-platform mailing list
Haskell-platform@projects.haskell.org
http://projects.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-platform

Reply via email to