I'm not sure I understand why the Hackage server is building packages in
#462: Automatic rebuild of depending packages once failed dependency re-uploaded and builds. --------------------------------+------------------------------------------- Reporter: golubovsky | Owner: Type: enhancement | Status: new Priority: normal | Milestone: _|_ Component: hackageDB website | Version: Severity: normal | Resolution: Keywords: | Difficulty: hard (< 1 day) Ghcversion: 6.10.1 | Platform: --------------------------------+------------------------------------------- Comment (by mokus): Replying to [comment:6 malcolm.wallace@cs.york.ac.uk]: the first place. Surely the only thing of interest is generating documentation - why is a full build necessary? That's a very good point too, and I suspect there are some cabal- architecture-related reasons for it - a full build is probably the easiest way to get the documentation to build, especially when you consider the way cabal builds can depend non-trivially on the set of installed packages or really anything else the Setup.hs file wants to check. I for one agree that I only really care whether my documentation gets built, though. I've been a bit annoyed lately because of things like the bytestring 0.9.1.5 update, not so much because of the build-failure black mark my project gets as a result but because it also keeps my documentation from building. As I mentioned a few minutes ago at the end of my comment at http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/hackage/ticket/598#comment:2, I believe that many users are put off a package much more by lack of easily- accessible documentation than by the fact that it didn't build on some particular machine. -- Ticket URL: http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/hackage/ticket/462#comment:7 Hackage http://haskell.org/cabal/ Hackage: Cabal and related projects