Re: [Haskell-cafe] The instability of Haskell libraries

On 24/04/10 01:34, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic wrote:

Keith Sheppard writes:

...

What Gwern said for 1) and 3)

...

2) Not all head repositories are kept stable/buildable at all times.

Isn't it bad practice to not have a buildable repo? In any case package owners would be free to use or ignore the data as they like, but I'm pretty sure it would be useful to many.

I often work on different sub-parts of my packages; as such the interactions between them might not work. I don't see why I should ensure that it does, as the repository is a _development environment_ not a release.

I don't think anyone will *force* you to behave in a particular way. If you don't see the use of a service like this one then don't use it. It's really that simple. The service could even demand opt-in to not waste time/energy on unstable repos.

That said, there are some projects which generally _are_ buildable/usable for their repositories (e.g. XMonad and XMonad-Contrib). But these are large multi-person projects with moving targets; the stuff i write is being developed by myself only.

Then there are developers like me, who even on small one-man projects try to keep the official/published repo buildable at all times. I keep my development environment local or sometimes in an un-advertised repo. /M -- Magnus Therning (OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4) magnus＠therning．org Jabber: magnus＠therning．org http://therning.org/magnus identi.ca|twitter: magthe