-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 On 21/09/15 11:43, Francesco Ariis wrote:

it is very difficult to beat the convenience of:

apt-get install hakskell-platform # emerge cabal-install

Even shorter. - -- Alexander alexander@plaimi.net https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJV//LFAAoJENQqWdRUGk8BXBEQAKlxDJf9w6pZTUpyGInENpw7 snTEPk/EUnW42D/JkGiqjoBZaFnSq2xksT8Z5SWivlW2JeXjKk16Mg2JxkT4H/KY ejAx/Woqsh5XBlOjn9bMeUz2IowqujeSAFzoCMb+RyqEejGZJDPI1vuxmGIClIzM BWq8U7/AEetudjZoRnhSib7/wS2cj8OPdab6rpwVVl57n0DGVKrLk5OHFRGdx+RL c0FC5AUjFU+N8WGoMCFBeEwrspw5QSxSkdzqfNnLsEGdy3JSD20Q8aX3/K9qi0In NpNU//OLrR7eKEx4COqMxLotqnfdglSkC25q7yI1pwJjX+/ubNHqSDlGun0KNjq2 23GvWNOC3WimDZTmUEpHxaRyQCIz2PsAfbKbMR76nKWAU8nm6AXf7bwPBNLDLnii MwkpVCn9595IsUWLO2EhV6EN45klO/7AWPASy7S4V8fjwO/DHVRRd31eAcoi3Dfv H+aB5gbEJzUllXkM0l0M5q/HsBJsCQReDLfmDPMNlkVoYkHqlywfBdHIIvdyzBUU UB6JDhkqkjyCi890/rGnmHd7aST6oVdel1pQLOrOVP2A4lZb+QWgM+zvylTTOq33 rJOYtzW4sBHTu3JSS2csStiLa+9hUcOX3J8sHt48bZju5/lYt9M9qrhY0F/4+UGY FGS9ZL9Nf1EmyD3ybsrp =0/kx -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

The issue is that Platform installs packages into the global package database, usually causing conflicts if you're building a package that needs something newer. The point isn't abandoning, it's changing the default recommendation on the Haskell.org site to things that work out of the box more often for users until Platform is fixed. I haven't used a hypothetical Platform that includes Stack, it's going to depend entirely on how well it works. If it's equivalent to the minimal installs we've been directing people towards (nothing extra in the global pkg db) but with Stack included, then that'd probably be fine. That's not here _now_, so let's fix the website. People pushed back on this and the committee has chosen to ignore it, again and again, now the excuse of "oh a fix is coming" is about to be used to push it off again. The downloads page should never have been changed to emphasize Platform again to begin with because it hadn't been fixed yet. You don't expect us to believe the current presentation is neutral, do you? (Attached screenshot) You make the alternatives to Platform sound like a construction kit, not the means of installing Haskell that has become the default recommendation for _many_ because of the problems with Platform over the years.

especially for new users interested in using frameworks with complex dependency structures.

Really? Complex dependency structures? The committee has been bulldozing over the concerns of end-users for too long and too many times. How is this the committee a body acting on behalf of the community when everything the community says appears to go nowhere, even on something as straight-forward as making sure the recommendations are what works best and most often? On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 10:06 AM, John Wiegley wrote:

...

...

...

...

...

Christopher Allen writes:

...

1. ghc-pkg 2. The global vs. user package databases 3. Cabal 4. What Platform does to their build environment

...

New Haskell users are least equipped to understand errors caused by:

...

1. Package version conflicts 2. Something innate to their install, rather than something wrong with their package constraints.

Unless I am mistaken, every one of these points relates to the usage of cabal after installing the platform, rather than to the Platform itself?

Once Stack is in the platform, do you agree it will rectify every concern you mentioned? If so, I'd rather not abandon the platform, only to be seen re-adopting it after a few months.

John

-- Chris Allen Currently working on http://haskellbook.com

I'm wondering if all this comes down to the time horizon. If a new HP is out with Stack in a few months, do you believe it's worth editing the downloads page now? Or are you asking for it to happen now because you'd rather something happen, than risk a delay where nothing happens?

Edit it now because the people who come to the site to learn how they should install Haskell over the next few months matter. It should take a couple minutes to make the change, I'd say edit it now to recommend the existing Minimal GHC installation procedures that were in place. We can use the previous versions as a baseline.

Or are you asking for it to happen now because you'd rather something happen, than risk a delay where nothing happens?

If Platform doesn't get fixed, that's on Platform. It's also a separate problem. The downloads page should reflect the current, best understanding of what's the most problem-free way for people, especially beginners who can't evaluate or compare alternatives, to install GHC and the associated kit. That has not been Platform for some time now. Is there a problem with changing the downloads page now and changing it again months from now after the alternative you're anticipating has been tested? Is there anything blocking this? Do you need me to write the PR? On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 11:19 AM, John Wiegley wrote:

...

...

...

...

...

Christopher Allen writes:

...

The committee has been bulldozing over the concerns of end-users for too long and too many times. How is this the committee a body acting on behalf of the community when everything the community says appears to go nowhere, even on something as straight-forward as making sure the recommendations are what works best and most often?

If you would like to discuss the way the committee operates, can we do that in a separate thread? I'd prefer to focus on the Platform and download options here.

I'm wondering if all this comes down to the time horizon. If a new HP is out with Stack in a few months, do you believe it's worth editing the downloads page now? Or are you asking for it to happen now because you'd rather something happen, than risk a delay where nothing happens?

John

-- Chris Allen Currently working on http://haskellbook.com

Resending because mailman held my message for moderation because of an attached image of the current downloads page. The issue is that Platform installs packages into the global package database, usually causing conflicts if you're building a package that needs something newer. The point isn't abandoning, it's changing the default recommendation on the Haskell.org site to things that work out of the box more often for users until Platform is fixed. I haven't used a hypothetical Platform that includes Stack, it's going to depend entirely on how well it works. If it's equivalent to the minimal installs we've been directing people towards (nothing extra in the global pkg db) but with Stack included, then that'd probably be fine. That's not here _now_, so let's fix the website. People pushed back on this and the committee has chosen to ignore it, again and again, now the excuse of "oh a fix is coming" is about to be used to push it off again. The downloads page should never have been changed to emphasize Platform again to begin with because it hadn't been fixed yet. You don't expect us to believe the current presentation is neutral, do you? (http://imgur.com/iQm5OWR) You make the alternatives to Platform sound like a construction kit, not the means of installing Haskell that has become the default recommendation for _many_ because of the problems with Platform over the years.

especially for new users interested in using frameworks with complex dependency structures.

Really? Complex dependency structures? The committee has been bulldozing over the concerns of end-users for too long and too many times. How is this the committee a body acting on behalf of the community when everything the community says appears to go nowhere, even on something as straight-forward as making sure the recommendations are what works best and most often? On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 10:06 AM, John Wiegley wrote:

...

...

...

...

...

Christopher Allen writes:

...

1. ghc-pkg 2. The global vs. user package databases 3. Cabal 4. What Platform does to their build environment

...

New Haskell users are least equipped to understand errors caused by:

...

1. Package version conflicts 2. Something innate to their install, rather than something wrong with their package constraints.

Unless I am mistaken, every one of these points relates to the usage of cabal after installing the platform, rather than to the Platform itself?

Once Stack is in the platform, do you agree it will rectify every concern you mentioned? If so, I'd rather not abandon the platform, only to be seen re-adopting it after a few months.

John

-- Chris Allen Currently working on http://haskellbook.com

We should change it to what it was: the suite of Minimal GHC installs for Windows, Mac OS X, and Linux. This was well attested as the default recommendation, particularly among people that have to help new people regularly. We can revisit changing the downloads page after it's fixed when other options become available and well-tested (Platform+Stack, Stack by itself, wildcard, whatever). On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 11:18 AM, Michael Snoyman wrote:

On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 6:06 PM, John Wiegley wrote:

...

...

...

...

...

> Christopher Allen writes:

...

1. ghc-pkg 2. The global vs. user package databases 3. Cabal 4. What Platform does to their build environment

...

New Haskell users are least equipped to understand errors caused by:

...

1. Package version conflicts 2. Something innate to their install, rather than something wrong with their package constraints.

Unless I am mistaken, every one of these points relates to the usage of cabal after installing the platform, rather than to the Platform itself?

Once Stack is in the platform, do you agree it will rectify every concern you mentioned? If so, I'd rather not abandon the platform, only to be seen re-adopting it after a few months.

John _______________________________________________

In theory: yes, using Stack with the Haskell Platform will solve this problems. However, theory does not always add up to reality, for various reasons we may not be able to predict. I'll give a few examples:

* There's no clear timeframe for the next HP release including Stack * It's unclear what exactly will be in the global database at that time * It's unclear how MSYS2 will be handled on Windows * There are a few bugs that have been reported to the Stack and conduit repos recently[1][2] about bad interactions with the global packages from HP * Non-unique install package IDs can lead to shadowing with HP[3] * There's no talk of the upgrade story around HP

We can find all of these things out, but making decisions today based on a theoretical future state makes no sense to me.

Chris has done a great job here of collecting a lot of the reasons why so many people have been advocating against the Haskell Platform. I do not believe the current wording on the downloads page, nor any of the discussions we've had via email or issue trackers, comes close to reflecting what the community actually believes is best practice today.

My recommendation: we look at the current state of all tooling, and decide what will be the best choice for most new users to Haskell. We don't need to cater to experienced users, since we all know about the choices. The downloads page should be explicitly about first impressions with new users. And we should assume those first impressions will be happening today, not a month, six months, or two years from now.

Michael

[1] https://github.com/commercialhaskell/stack/issues/980 [2] http://stackoverflow.com/questions/32444762/cabal-repl-wont-run-cant-load-so... [3] https://github.com/haskell/cabal/issues/2830

-- Chris Allen Currently working on http://haskellbook.com