Re: [Haskell-community] haskell.org download page

I also think the downloads should be the minimal HP and separated from getting started. But that doesn't mean we can't bridge the gap with a simple link at the bottom of the downloads page pointing people to the next step: "Next...get started with Haskell" or something similar. Then I'm sure we can come up with a getting started page that has links to different tracks targeted at different audiences. Based on this discussion I can think of three obvious getting started tracks: Total beginner command line ghci Cabal-install Stack And we can even present them horizontally so they all are presented at the same time and on the same level! On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 3:30 AM, Michael Snoyman wrote:

This sounds awesome, I'm totally behind it. Thank you Gershom!

On Thu, Sep 1, 2016, 10:09 AM Gershom B wrote:

...

I think this is a very good point being made. We should disengangle the installer question from the “getting started” question. Someone on reddit even proposed having two seperate pages entirely.

A getting started page that promoted a stack centric workflow for beginners as a good “default path” would be reasonable in my eyes, and certainly worth discussing. Certainly if it let us lay the downloads page to rest with a single option for a minimal installer (with perhaps slightly different branding as discussed on a ticket I linked earlier — “Haskell Toolchain” or the like) that provided ghc, stack and cabal all, then I think that would be a very good way to go.

That way Nicolas and others who wanted to direct people to the downloads page, and then wanted to teach them with one sort of approach would be able to do so, people who wanted to direct people to the downloads page, and teach them with a stack-based approach would be able to do so, and people coming to the site directly could immediately find a “getting started page” with a single approach that got them up and running quickly, and that approach could well be stack-oriented if that’s what people think gives the best experience for that particular use case.

(Again, I give the caveat I’m speaking just for myself here, and thinking this through as an idea I’d like to hear others’ thoughts on).

—gershom

On August 31, 2016 at 5:48:41 PM, Nicolas Wu (nicolas.wu@gmail.com) wrote:

...

Hi Paolo,

On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 1:53 PM Paolo Giarrusso wrote:

...

...

The decision about how to manage projects and their dependencies should be open and isn't for beginners, whether that be using stack or cabal: both have their merits, and I don't want to push one over the other.

I'm honestly confused what you're arguing. You say this decision isn't for beginners, yet you propose offering the HP. So how should a beginner install a package without first deciding whether to use cabal-install or stack? Or can a beginner meaningfully be expected to learn using both alternatives?

Sorry for not being clear, my bad. Hopefully I can clarify and elaborate a bit more.

I think a beginner doesn't usually make the choice of how to use GHC/stack/cabal by themselves; they are usually being instructed by someone (or a resource) that has decided that for them. On that front I don't think there's a singular best way to approach this; there's diversity in the way people approach teaching and that's fine and healthy, there's also diversity in the way people learn and the goals they have with the language and that's fine and healthy too. We should be supporting people who want to learn the language as well as people who want to contribute to teaching. We should respect diversity in those roles; if someone wants their students to use only stack then by all means they can do so, that shouldn't stop others from using ghc or ghci directly.

For instance, if a beginner is just trying to run small examples they see on a blog, then maybe all they need is a call to ghci. If they're learning about making a simple binary they might want ghc. If they want to have a whole managed project, perhaps they're after either stack or cabal. The point is that they're usually guided by something, and those guides do differ on what they prefer and recommend. The default download should easily support these different modes of learning and teaching.

...

Also, do both tools have their merits *for beginners*? We're talking of cabal as-is, not of the ongoing work on new-build.

I'm talking about having a default that bundles tools like ghc, cabal, and stack, since these are the main tools our community has for compiling and executing Haskell code. I don't want to force people into one of these--whether that be students or educators. In all cases the default download recommendation should support all of these since they are the mainstream tools we use. To avoid confusion I think there should be only one recommended option on the main download page (and here the HP minimal seems to satisfy this, and stack seems to preclude this). The download page should also have a link to other resources (such as the HP Full, stack only, and other distributions like Haskell for Mac) on another page.

Since there seems to be confusion about how the committee comes to a consensus I should note that at this point I'm only speaking for myself here. This is just my recommendation, and I'm open and willing to listen to other views before considering what I think is best. I am not usually overtly vocal in these discussions, but I do read what is said and form my own opinions.

Best wishes,

Nick _______________________________________________ Haskell-community mailing list Haskell-community@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-community

_______________________________________________ Haskell-community mailing list Haskell-community@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-community

_______________________________________________ Haskell-community mailing list Haskell-community@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-community