On Sun, Aug 10, 2008 at 02:16:25PM +1000, Manuel M T Chakravarty wrote:
Duncan Coutts:
I don't especially relish having to learn another vcs tool or raising the bar for contributions to Cabal either (we have lots of people who make small one-off contributions).
I don't think it matters what vcs Cabal uses. GHC does already for a while use a separate repo for its version of Cabal, and the GHC Cabal repo needs to be explicitly updated to ensure that changes to Cabal do not randomly break GHC. To be honest, if I had to say anything, I would say that GHC has to uses fixed, stable versions of Cabal (like it does of gmp). So, it really doesn't matter what vcs Cabal uses.
Unless we do get to a point where we are literally using tarballs[1] of Cabal, I don't think using a mixture of VCSs for Cabal is a good idea. Having to convert patches from one VCS format to the other sounds like a recipe for a lot of pain and suffering. [1] which I think is a bad idea anyway, as it makes it a lot more hassle to fix Cabal bugs that GHC+bootlibs expose. Thanks Ian