On 2013-12-17 22:03, Tillmann Vogt wrote:
> Check this out:
>
> http://packdeps.haskellers.com/reverse/text
>
> 306 outdated dependencies!
> I am guessing that most libraries could easily change the boundaries to
>>=0.11 && <1.1

> <http://hackage.haskell.org/package/digestive-functors-blaze>

> because the API hasn't changed a lot. As far as I can see only a
> function was added.
> Or is everybody using sandboxing tools?
> Maybe the author of a library should have the right to change the
> boundary of all reverse dependencies. So that Brian has to adjust all
> 306 boundaries if he knows that this would work :-)
> Just the boundaries, not the code.
>

Devil's advocate question: Should bumping a package major version *even
if there are no incompatible changes* be allowed according to the PVP?
It seems it causes a lot of inconvenience for people who are following
the PVP in their dependency declarations.

@bos: Of course, I understand that this was probably to signal
stability, and as such fully support the bump (not that you need my
support), I'm just playing devil's advocate regarding the PVP.

Regards,

_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe