Re: Gearing up (again) for the next release: 2014.2.0.0

On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 12:19 PM, Michael Snoyman wrote:

On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 1:15 PM, Erik Hesselink wrote:

...

On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 12:11 PM, Michael Snoyman wrote:

...

3. You have yet to demonstrate a single example of breakage to the HP that would be caused by including tls.

I don't want to get involved in the arguments about the other technicalities, but we've had breakages with the tls suite of packages in the past due to lack of upper bounds. Here's one quoted from an email to Vincent Hanquez:

The problem was that tls 1.1.2 doesn't list an upper bound on its crypto-pubkey dependency, but doesn't build with the new 0.2.* releases.

I'm not arguing about upper bounds in general. I don't dispute (and never had!) that upper bounds can in many cases allow builds to succeed where they would otherwise fail. I'm speaking specifically about the case of the Haskell Platform, which makes all version bounds in the package itself irrelevant by hard-coding exact versions of all dependencies.

Ah, of course, that makes sense: all dependencies have to be included in the platform as well. Sorry for the confusion. Erik