I might be wrong,<div><br></div><div>but the impression I always had is that that field is something that most developer struggle to keep in sync. Maybe it</div><div>was provisional ages ago, but they simply forgot to upgrade to &quot;stable&quot; or they are simply too humble and think</div>
<div>&quot;How am I to judge if a package is stable or not&quot;? :)</div><div><br></div><div>My 2 cents :P</div><div>A.<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 10 February 2013 20:38, Petr Pudlák <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:petr.mvd@gmail.com" target="_blank">petr.mvd@gmail.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">Dear Haskellers,<div><br></div><div>Looking at Control.Monad: <a href="http://hackage.haskell.org/packages/archive/base/4.6.0.0/doc/html/Control-Monad.html" target="_blank">http://hackage.haskell.org/packages/archive/base/4.6.0.0/doc/html/Control-Monad.html</a></div>


<div>I see: &quot;Stability<span style="white-space:pre-wrap">	</span>provisional&quot;. I checked some older versions and it&#39;s the same. This feel somewhat unsettling - if Control.Monad is provisional, do we have any &quot;stable&quot; packages at all?</div>


<div><br></div><div>  Best regards,</div><div>  Petr Pudlak</div></div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
Haskell-Cafe mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org">Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org</a><br>
<a href="http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe" target="_blank">http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>