Just to keep haskell-cafe updated on this issue...
On Tue, 2008-04-15 at 22:15 -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
When I went to make my upload of MissingH 1.0.1, Hackage rejected it,
saying:
Instead of 'ghc-options: -XPatternSignatures' use 'extensions:
PatternSignatures'
Now fixed!
(Well, at
[snip]
The current a priori check, which said there were no fatal errors, while the
a posteriori check failed, is misleading. Wouldn't it be better to warn
potential
uploaders that this first check is not complete?
I'm not sure I see what you're getting at. We can't do a full build
On Fri, 2008-04-18 at 16:19 +0100, Duncan Coutts wrote:
If there are any that you think are rejecting legitimate packages then do
complain (as in this thread).
I was sloppy in my upload of Emping 0.5 in not checking the libraries
dependencies sufficiently and not doing a build (my apologies
On Apr 21, 2008, at 7:38 , Hans van Thiel wrote:
On Fri, 2008-04-18 at 16:19 +0100, Duncan Coutts wrote:
If there are any that you think are rejecting legitimate packages
then do
complain (as in this thread).
Configuring Emping-0.5.1...
cabal-setup: At least the following dependencies are
On Mon, 2008-04-21 at 14:30 -0400, Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH wrote:
On Apr 21, 2008, at 7:38 , Hans van Thiel wrote:
On Fri, 2008-04-18 at 16:19 +0100, Duncan Coutts wrote:
If there are any that you think are rejecting legitimate packages
then do
complain (as in this thread).
On Mon, 2008-04-21 at 13:38 +0200, Hans van Thiel wrote:
Configuring Emping-0.5.1...
cabal-setup: At least the following dependencies are missing:
gtk -any
I'll have to leave it at that, since my local Cabal version does configure
and build,
and I obviously can't use Hackage as a
On Tue, 2008-04-15 at 22:15 -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
When I went to make my upload of MissingH 1.0.1, Hackage rejected it,
saying:
Instead of 'ghc-options: -XPatternSignatures' use 'extensions:
PatternSignatures'
It hadn't rejected MissingH 1.0.0, even though it had the same thing.
I
On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 10:43:24AM +0100, Duncan Coutts wrote:
I have now fixed that by eliminating the use of Read in the .cabal
parser and basically adding an Other/Unknown constructor to several of
the enumeration types, including Extension. So as of Cabal-1.4 it will
be possible to add new
On Fri April 18 2008 4:43:24 am Duncan Coutts wrote:
It seems arbitrary that Hackage would suddenly reject this valid
usage.
Yes it is valid though I hope you can see the general intention of the
suggestion. If it were not for the compatibility problem it would be
preferable to use:
Sure,
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] John Goerzen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri April 18 2008 4:43:24 am Duncan Coutts wrote:
It seems arbitrary that Hackage would suddenly reject this valid
usage.
Yes it is valid though I hope you can see the general intention of the
suggestion. If it
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] haskell-cafe@haskell.org
writes:
On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 10:43:24AM +0100, Duncan Coutts wrote:
I have now fixed that by eliminating the use of Read in the .cabal
parser and basically adding an Other/Unknown constructor to several of
the enumeration types,
On 2008.04.15 22:15:29 -0500, John Goerzen [EMAIL PROTECTED] scribbled 0.7K
characters:
When I went to make my upload of MissingH 1.0.1, Hackage rejected it,
saying:
Instead of 'ghc-options: -XPatternSignatures' use 'extensions:
PatternSignatures'
It hadn't rejected MissingH 1.0.0, even
On Tuesday 15 April 2008 10:53:03 pm Gwern Branwen wrote:
On 2008.04.15 22:15:29 -0500, John Goerzen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
scribbled 0.7K characters:
When I went to make my upload of MissingH 1.0.1, Hackage rejected it,
saying:
Instead of 'ghc-options: -XPatternSignatures' use 'extensions:
13 matches
Mail list logo
