I still favor parsec 2 over parsec 3 because a) parsec 3 is no longer haskell98 (as major parts of parsec 2 are) b) I don't like the compatibility layer (modules with re-exports) of parsec 3 for parsec 2 Without the compatibility layer (b) and making the package a new major version of parsec, we would probably not discuss this issue. I think the maintainers of "parsec 3" should create new package "parsec3" without the compatibility layer. A new package parsec2 was already created. There are simply no blessed parser packages! The problem is that so many package simply have "parsec" as dependency, otherwise I would vote for removing parsec from HP (or vote for parsec2). Christian Am 06.11.2010 16:18, schrieb Don Stewart:
Hey all,
This is a loose end in the package policy situation: when the HP has a major upgrade, the policy is to do all major upgrades for any packages contained in the HP, as long as they don't add new dependencies.
One exception to this rule has been parsec, where parsec 2 was considered "blessed" on an ad hoc basis.
I propose we agree to remove this ad hoc rule, and thus the HP will ship with parsec 3.
Does anyone have concerns with this?
-- Don