simonmarhaskell:
Claus Reinke wrote:
cabal: - the separation into interpreter/compiler and resource as Setup does not set up the right mindset in users. for instance, you can "runhaskell Setup.hs --help" as for most unixy tools, but who'd think of that in this situation, and how much does it help?
+ add a dedicated command "cabal", which does nothing more than "runhaskell Setup", but is more memorable and suggestive
cabal-setup does this, but wasn't included with the latest release of Cabal. It should be in the next one, I hope. The plan is to deprecate 'runhaskell Setup.lhs' in favour of 'cabal-setup'. Feel free to suggest changing the name to 'cabal', although some might argue that 'cabal-get' is the high-level tool and should therefore get the name 'cabal' instead.
- cabal/darcs/haddock are no replacement for minimal help texts: cabal should require the existence of a README
absolutely, this has occurred to me too. There should be a stanard Cabal README file, and Don's mkcabal tool could drop it in the tree.
This occurred to me too. My current plan for mkcabal is that it creates: foo.cabal Setup.lhs README LICENSE based on a series of interactive questions, or command line args. -- Don