The test-suite section can mention the modules directly if we accept some recompilation. On Monday, December 31, 2012, Mikhail Glushenkov wrote:

Hi,

On Mon, Dec 31, 2012 at 3:56 PM, Johan Tibell javascript:;> wrote:

...

Hi,

Splitting out a library from cabal-install have been a goal for a long time. I don't know if we want to just expose every module that's there today or if we'd like to think a bit more about the API first.

We'll have to expose every module for which we want to write tests anyway.

-- () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments

On Mon, Dec 31, 2012 at 6:56 AM, Johan Tibell wrote:

Hi,

Splitting out a library from cabal-install have been a goal for a long time. I don't know if we want to just expose every module that's there today or if we'd like to think a bit more about the API first. Duncan, what do you think?

I'm not Duncan, but I'll give my perspective on this. The API will get versioned due to the nature of cabal packages and having more access would be helpful for tools like cabal-dev. In an ideal world cabal-dev would/will go away, but other tools that build on cabal-install might appear in the future. The risk of using the cabal-install modules as a library is that the API of cabal-install should be allowed to change freely between versions, potentially causing breakages in downstream tools. I think if that risk is understood by consumers of the API then it's actually really valuable to have that level of access to the internals. Basically, I'm +1 on making all of cabal-install into a library. Jason