Aaron Denney
Package names should never appear in source files IMHO.
I tend to the opposite view.
Then, as John points out, how is package Foo module A.B.C and package Bar module A.B.C any different than modules Foo.A.B.C and Bar.A.B.C?
I have great sympathy with this view - that packages are little different from a top-level name in the hierarchy. But Simon PJ's comment (on the wiki page) about the difference between specifying the _purpose_ of a module in its name, and the _provenance_ of a module in its package identifier, was very convincing. I have added (yet another) alternative proposal, to the wiki here: http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/GhcPackagesWithGrafting The details overlap significantly with the current proposals, but the main contribution I am trying to bring to the table is the (old but never implemented) idea of grafting a sub-hierarchy at an arbitrary location. This idea has a close relationship with specifying what package a module should come from. So, I have tried to combine the two. Regards, Malcolm