Don Stewart wrote:
andrewcoppin:
Hackage seems like a nice idea in principle. However,
I think in practice too: we had no central lib archive or dependency system, now we have 400 libraries, and a package installer, 10 months later.
Hackage is that new??
- The packages seem to be of quite variable quality. Some are excellent, some are rather poor (or just not maintained any more).
1. Welcome to the internet.
Well, yeah, I guess. ;-) As others have suggested, maybe a rating system or space for comments or something... [all very easy for the person who doesn't have to implement it.]
- (And, since I'm on Windows, I can't seem to get anything to install with Cabal...)
3. Report a bug. We need more developers on windows, for window to improve.
Where is the correct place for Cabal bugs? (And presumably "it doesn't work" wouldn't be a very helpful bug report. How about something more like my email just now regarding how to get the new Stream Fusion library built on Windows? Is that useful data to have?) Who's actually responsible for Cabal? Is it the GHC guys, or someone else entirely? (I still don't have a really clear idea of what Cabal does. When I give people Haskell code, they just compile it and use it. I'm not sure exactly what functionallity Cabal is supposed to add to the equation.)