Haskell packages require topological rebuilds and that always seems to cause problems when a rebuild needs to be coordinated across 3+ repos with even more packagers. +1 for one repository containing all ghc-dependent packages. And
On 03/07/2012 05:28 AM, Xyne wrote: preferably remove them from the other repositories.
In theory you could put all of the packages either in [extra] or in [community] to more easily manage the rebuilds, but no one with access to those repos is going to do that (the tools aren't in place, and getting them in place would be an uphill battle). I would also like if:
1) Either all haskell packages from extra/community would get a group like ghcDependency so tahat I can disable them easily in pacman.conf. 2) Or all the haskell packages in [haskell] would get a a different group name (e.g. haskellRepository) so that I can differentiate them from the packages from extra/community. This is to avoid confusion at user side when he needs to figure out what repository a package is from. Pacman does not store this info - so if you have something installed there is no easy way to find out what repository it is from.
The redundancy with [extra] and [community] is unfortunate, but ideally the devs would realize that this approach is optimal and support this repo. Redundant packages could then be removed from other repos. In a small voice: Or, please, at least add a group name for a ghc-dependent packages? A different group name for the ones in [extra]/[community] and the ones in [haskell].
Thanks to all the maintainers of haskell packages, Peter.