On 22 July 2010 16:56, Thomas DuBuisson
The hackage build logs can be misleading - many system specific packages may or may not build on hackage because it just isn't the right OS. Still other packages require particular C libraries that the hackage server doesn't have. For these reasons the build reports will come from end developer systems (see linked blog).
Presumably you can only get false negatives - i.e. "correct" packages failing to build due to missing C libraries, or depending on Haskell libraries at different version numbers to the build server?
Isak Hansen:
How about taking it one step further, actually "hiding" unmaintained packages after a grace period?
Hiding unmaintained libraries seems contrary to Hackage's spirit - if you want to depend on an unmaintained library why not volunteer to be the maintainer.