On Fri, May 13, 2005 at 12:46:26AM -0700, John Meacham wrote:
It is funny you should mention this. I need this feature exactly to get around limitations of darcs that wern't a problem with CVS :). Darcs can't compose multiple repositories such that they share a root, therefore in order to compose several haskell projects, I need to treat each of their source directories as potential locations of haskell code.
There are a _lot_ of external factors that constrain the way one may lay out files. Making cabal less flexible in this regard would only make it less likely to be adopted. I already had to jump through hoops to get hierarchical names to play well with automake due to its ideas of what goes in subdirectories were different than haskells and it wasn't very fun and not the sort of thing I like to do. (fight my tools) We should make cabal very flexible if we expect it to be used.
Hmm.. I think I may have been confused about what feature I was responding too here... but the reasoning is more or less the same for both changes. John -- John Meacham - ⑆repetae.net⑆john⑈