On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 7:38 AM, Magnus Therning <magnus@therning.org> wrote:

On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 1:47 AM, <tam@hiddenrock.com> wrote:
>> What do you mean with "they don't care"? Why don't you try and help,
>> instead of reinventing the wheal?
>
> By "they don't care", I mean that, over the last two months, the mailing list
> has seen only three messages from anyone with commit rights to the
> arch-haskell repo. You may note that I and another member of the list *have*
> offered to help [1][2] and got no response. Given the rarity of updates to
> the arch-haskell repo and my unbridled hatred for trying to reverse engineer
> undocumented processes that SHOULD be documented, I figured my needs would be
> more expeditiously filled by taking matters into my own hands.

I am very sorry for not having responded to [1]. I had planned to do
it, but forgot about it. As for [2] I didn't understand that as an
email that I actually needed to weigh in on, I simply agreed with what
it says. Apparently I got that one completely wrong.

Indeed. On such a low traffic list it does not hurt to voice your agreement explicitly and loudly. A silent nod is indistinguishable from a delivery failure.

> In retrospect, saying "they don't care" was overzealous on my part. It is,
> however, evident that the powers-that-be don't have time to maintain the repo
> in a way that is useful to me, so I fixed the problem for myself (which, you
> may note, is how the open source community works: the source speaks,
> do-ocracy, etc, etc).
>
> So I'll continue tinkering with my solution and, when it is sufficiently
> robust, I hope to release it to a wider audience. And yes, there will be
> more-than-adequate documentation. It's possible I may get bored or run into
> an obstacle I'm too lazy to overcome or be introduced to a glorious extant
> solution, in which case I'll convert. But until then, this is what solves my
> problems better than anything else I know of. That's kinda how the open
> source model works.

That sounds good, it would however be interesting to find out what
your criteria is (what you are looking for) and how your tool
satisfies them.

On this point, I had a need for haskell-http-conduit so I went ahead and spent a few hours learning about cblrepo, forking habs, adding the package and all its dependencies, making sure it worked for me, and submitting a pull request.
There has still been no response to that pull request.
But luckily I also had the idea of writing to the mailing list, and Fabio kindly eventually replied that he already provided haskell-http-conduit in the [haskell-extra] repo, so now I am using that instead.
By the way is there any way I could have found out about [haskell-extra] without writing to the list or scouring its archives? It would be a good thing to put on the README for habs.git.
Meanwhile, I'm going to put a link to it on the wiki.

/M

--
Magnus Therning OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4
email: magnus@therning.org jabber: magnus@therning.org
twitter: magthe http://therning.org/magnus

_______________________________________________
arch-haskell mailing list
arch-haskell@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-haskell