
26 Feb
2014
26 Feb
'14
10:43 a.m.
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 12:36 AM, John Lato
7. awesomeApp users attempt to do cabal update; cabal install, which fails inscrutably (because it tries to mix foo-0.2 with bar-0.1)
There's nothing in this situation that requires any of these packages be unmaintained. The problem is that, rather than wanting to reproduce a fixed set of package versions (which cabal already allows for if that's really desired), sometimes it's desirable that updates be held back in active code bases
Not to mention, if I maintain "bar", I can basically never go on vacation,
because the dude who maintains "foo" can push a new update and break all my
users any time.
G
--
Gregory Collins