>From the downloads <https://www.haskell.org/ghc/download_ghc_7_8_4> page on the GHC homepage:
Version 7.8.4 (released December 23rd 2014) Stop! For most users, we recommend installing the Haskell Platform <http://hackage.haskell.org/platform/> instead of GHC. The current Haskell Platform release includes a recent GHC release as well as some other tools (such as cabal), and a larger set of libraries that are known to work together. On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 11:01 AM, Simon Peyton Jones <simo...@microsoft.com> wrote: > 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 > > > > _______________________________________________ > ghc-devs mailing list > ghc-d...@haskell.org > http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs > >
_______________________________________________ Haskell-platform mailing list Haskell-platform@projects.haskell.org http://projects.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-platform
