Ganesh Sittampalam wrote:
The parsec98 name sounds cool, but if used, it'll last a long time I think it'll just be sowing more confusion for a future in which the origins of the name have faded into obscurity. And what if someone wants to keep it roughly as is, but bring it up to date with the latest Haskell standard? The name would be rather a barrier then.
If versions are going to be forked off, let's aim for a consistent naming scheme - parsec2, QuickCheck1, etc. Not sure how to deal with HaXml 1.13 (the other strong candidate for this kind of treatment).
+1 to the idea of doing this as a general practice, and to all the particulars raised. Just like a package broken by the new exceptions can always switch to importing old-exception for the time being, it should be similarly easy for people to remain stable on parsec, quickcheck, haxml and such for some time to come -- not even necessarily to encourage this, but simply because it makes a uniform treatment of legacy code much more manageable. --Sterl.