It strikes me that separating packages that have a relationship to ghc always seems to introduce a maintenance burden. Even with the core relationships moved to ghc-base, this might be a problem. brandon s allbery kf8nh allbery.b@gmail.com On Tue, Nov 25, 2025, 14:23 Matthew Pickering <matthewtpickering@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi all,

I'm trying to establish consensus around the next stages of the reinstallable base project.

It seems to me the next step is to move the `base` package out of the GHC tree into a separate repo so it can be maintained like a normal haskell package.

If you have an opinion then please leave your feedback on this email thread.

The issue is discussed here: https://github.com/haskell/core-libraries-committee/issues/375 and also on discourse

https://discourse.haskell.org/t/what-are-the-next-steps-for-reinstallable-ba...

Cheers,

Matt _______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list -- ghc-devs@haskell.org To unsubscribe send an email to ghc-devs-leave@haskell.org