Again, see http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/PackageReorg for proposed termiology. What we currently call "core libs" we propose to rename GHC Boot Packages S | -----Original Message----- | From: libraries-bounces@haskell.org [mailto:libraries-bounces@haskell.org] On Behalf Of Ian Lynagh | Sent: 24 November 2006 17:24 | To: Neil Mitchell | Cc: Haskell Libraries | Subject: Re: Re[2]: Proposal: Add System.FilePath to base | | On Thu, Nov 23, 2006 at 04:48:36PM +0000, Neil Mitchell wrote: | > | > "I propose that this module is added to the set of modules which is | > guaranteed to be available in every Haskell implementation, and can be | > used by programs with a simple import statement." | > | > Currently that means "is in base". | | For GHC that means "is a core lib"; I'm not sure of the policy for the | other implementations. Perhaps we should rename that "is a GHC core lib" | and define a list of global "core libs" (of which "GHC core libs" would | be a superset) somewhere? | | I haven't looked at the particular library, but have no problem with | some sort of file path manipulating library to be used by cabal | Setup.hs's being in the core libs set. | | | Thanks | Ian | | _______________________________________________ | Libraries mailing list | Libraries@haskell.org | http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries