On 01/22/2015 10:50 AM, Herbert Valerio Riedel wrote:
On 2015-01-22 at 14:59:51 +0100, Geoffrey Mainland wrote:
The current situation is that DPH is not being built or maintained at all. Given this state of affairs, it is hard to justify keeping it around---DPH is just bitrotting.
I am proposing that we reconnect it to the build and keep it building, putting it in minimal maintenance mode. Ok, but how do we avoid issues like
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lang.haskell.ghc.devel/5645/
in the future then? DPH became painful back then, because we didn't know what to do with 'vector' (which as a package at the time also suffered from neglect of maintainership)
Cheers, hvr
That's part of "minimal maintenance mode." Yes, keeping DPH will impose some burden. I am not pretending that keeping DPH imposes no cost, but instead asking what cost we are willing to pay to keep DPH working---maybe the answer is "none." As for the particular issue you mentioned, I patched DPH to fix compatibility with the new vector. Those changes have been in the tree for some time, but DPH was never reconnected to the build, so it has bitrotted again. Note that vector *also* no longer builds with the other libraries in the tree, so if we excise DPH, we should excise vector. I am willing to put some effort into fixing these sorts of problems when they come up. That may still impose too much burden on the other developers. Geoff