Re: Opening up Cabal development

2016-07-17 Thread Edward Z. Yang
Yep, of course. (I sometimes get the feeling that a less good way people do this is by just not documenting the feature :o) Excerpts from Paolo G. Giarrusso's message of 2016-07-17 04:27:14 -0700: > Edward Z. Yang mit.edu> writes: > > > Excerpts from Herbert Valerio Riedel's message of

Re: Opening up Cabal development

2016-07-17 Thread Paolo G . Giarrusso
Edward Z. Yang mit.edu> writes: > Excerpts from Herbert Valerio Riedel's message of 2016-07-13 23:40:06 -0700: > > I.e. write up a specification/proposal outlining motivation (i.e. what > > problem does this solve), specify what the changes are exactly (syntax & > > semantics), what the

Re: Opening up Cabal development

2016-07-14 Thread Edward Z. Yang
Excerpts from Oleg Grenrus's message of 2016-07-14 02:08:54 -0700: > About convenience libraries I agree even more. We should discussed them more. > There are questions I’d might to ask, but I guess it too late It's not too late. They are not in any real release. They can be removed. > Or maybe

Re: Opening up Cabal development

2016-07-14 Thread Oleg Grenrus
> On 14 Jul 2016, at 09:54, Edward Z. Yang wrote: > > Excerpts from Herbert Valerio Riedel's message of 2016-07-13 23:40:06 -0700: >> I.e. write up a specification/proposal outlining motivation (i.e. what >> problem does this solve), specify what the changes are exactly (syntax

Re: Opening up Cabal development

2016-07-14 Thread Edward Z. Yang
Excerpts from Herbert Valerio Riedel's message of 2016-07-13 23:40:06 -0700: > I.e. write up a specification/proposal outlining motivation (i.e. what > problem does this solve), specify what the changes are exactly (syntax & > semantics), what the consequences are, and so on. > > Then we

Re: Opening up Cabal development

2016-07-13 Thread Mikhail Glushenkov
On 14 July 2016 at 03:13, Edward Z. Yang wrote: >1. Can we parse all of Hackage? > >[...] > >3. Can we build all Setup.hs scripts on Hackage? This lets us know > which APIs in Cabal matter, and which ones we can change. > We'll need to establish base truth

Re: Opening up Cabal development

2016-07-13 Thread Gershom B
On July 13, 2016 at 7:32:47 PM, Edward Z. Yang (ezy...@mit.edu) wrote: The general notion sounds good to me. I’m semi-indifferent between (1) and (2) though conservatively lean towards the latter. > - The Travis build must always be green. We should prioritize > adding more tests for things we

Re: Opening up Cabal development

2016-07-13 Thread Mikhail Glushenkov
Hi, On 14 July 2016 at 01:32, Edward Z. Yang wrote: > Why don't we give them all commit access! (If we want to do (1) also > look at the current PR queue.) Fine with me. I tried something like this on a smaller scale previously, giving write access to a number of people with a