Re: [Haskell-cafe] cabal specify a "tested version", ghci target?
On Sat, 2006-08-12 at 03:52 +0200, Marc Weber wrote:
1.) I know I can use Build-Depends: lib == <version>, lib2 < version, lib3 >= version and so on.
Do you think it would be useful to introducue some notation to indicate a "tested with" ?
Reason, purpose: I think its sometimes the case that a author/ mantainer is quite busy with other projects and misses that some dependencies break things.. If you want to try out you're left with some compiler errors and a dependency and have to try out which version works.
I would propose using this syntax: lib-1.3 >=1.1 to indicate that lib 1.1 is required at leeast and tested with up to 1.3.. Cabal might then give a warning if you try to use 1.4 or greater "using newer version than tested" or similar..
What do you think? Would this be useful?
Well there is actually already a "tested-with:" field that you can put in a .cabal file, however at the moment it refers only to the Haskell implementation, eg ghc-x.y, hugs-x.y etc not to versions of libraries. Yes, I think it's a quite reasonable argument to extend this to include exact versions of libraries that it has been tested with. What do others think? Duncan
Duncan Coutts
On Sat, 2006-08-12 at 03:52 +0200, Marc Weber wrote:
1.) I know I can use Build-Depends: lib == <version>, lib2 < version, lib3 >= version and so on.
Do you think it would be useful to introducue some notation to indicate a "tested with" ?
Reason, purpose: I think its sometimes the case that a author/ mantainer is quite busy with other projects and misses that some dependencies break things.. If you want to try out you're left with some compiler errors and a dependency and have to try out which version works.
I would propose using this syntax: lib-1.3 >=1.1 to indicate that lib 1.1 is required at leeast and tested with up to 1.3.. Cabal might then give a warning if you try to use 1.4 or greater "using newer version than tested" or similar..
What do you think? Would this be useful?
Well there is actually already a "tested-with:" field that you can put in a .cabal file, however at the moment it refers only to the Haskell implementation, eg ghc-x.y, hugs-x.y etc not to versions of libraries.
Yes, I think it's a quite reasonable argument to extend this to include exact versions of libraries that it has been tested with.
What do others think?
Sounds OK if someone wants to do it, but I don't think it should be a high priority... I'd rather see support for stuff like this built into HackageDB. I really want to have a "stable", "testing", and "unstable" sections in Hackage where testing and stable have packages that are known to work (or at least build) together. peace, isaac
participants (2)
-
Duncan Coutts -
Isaac Jones