More to the point, the policy does allow for telling library authors that they must rewrite their code into something that "may not necessarily be idiomatic". Adding a caveat to .cabal is trivial compared to replacing code with something ugly/clunky/non-idiomatic. An additional issue is that if code is going to break, I would like to change it in one go and be done with it. The current policy of drip-feeding bits and pieces of change requires me to manage the transition piecemeal over a number of years. The very example on the wiki page shows how the same code has to be rewritten twice, over the course of a 5 year transition. The spirit of the 3 release policy is a good compromise. However, the requirement for Wall-and-only-Wall clean compilation feels fanatical. It seems to be creating a straw-man persona, someone who doesn't care how often they have to change their code or what they have to change it into, as long as it compiles Wall-clean with no version-specific flags, and demands that they get exactly what they want without any compromise. -- View this message in context: http://haskell.1045720.n5.nabble.com/3-release-policy-and-Wno-compat-tp58232... Sent from the Haskell - Libraries mailing list archive at Nabble.com.