On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 7:29 PM, Gregg Lebovitz <glebovitz@gmail.com> wrote:Does haskell/hackage have something like debian's lintian?
On 4/23/2012 10:17 PM, Brandon Allbery wrote:On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 17:16, Gregg Lebovitz <glebovitz@gmail.com> wrote:
On 4/23/2012 3:39 PM, Brandon Allbery wrote:Brandon, I find that a little hard to believe. If the issues are similar to other systems and languages, then I think it is more likely that no one has volunteered to work on it. You volunteering to help?The other dirty little secret that is carefully being avoided here is the battle between the folks for whom Haskell is a language research platform and those who use it to get work done. It's not entirely inaccurate to say the former group would regard a fragmented module namespace as a good thing, specifically because it discourages people from considering it to be stable....
Debian has a detailed policy document that keeps evolving: http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/
Lintian tries hard to automate (as much as possible) policy-compliance http://lintian.debian.org/manual/index.html
Eg how packages should use the file system
http://tldp.org/LDP/Linux-Filesystem-Hierarchy/html/
Even 'boring' legal stuff like license-checking is somewhat automated http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep5/
And most important is the dos and donts for package dependency making possible nice pics http://collab-maint.alioth.debian.org/debtree/
Of course as Wren pointed out, the Linux communities have enough manpower to police their distributions which haskell perhaps cannot.
My question is really: Would not something like a haskell-lintian make such sanity checking easier and more useful for everyone?