Hi Roman, I think it is great that you made a fixed package available in a timely manner for the communtiy.

On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 1:10 PM, Roman Cheplyaka <roma@ro-che.info> wrote:
* Peter Simons <simons@cryp.to> [2014-05-11 21:39:30+0200]
>  > I will continue to maintain my fork, as I don't want this situation
>  > to repeat in the future.
>
> That doesn't make much sense to me, though. You've got what you wanted:
> the patch you needed has been applied!

Not quite. What I want is that this situation (package remaining uninstallable
for a non-trivial amount of time) never happens again. I don't want to go
through this process next time something breaks in 'temporary'.

Are you using cabal freeze?

There only seems like 2 situations where this event should be a problem.

1) As an application author you really want to upgrade exceptions to 0.6 in your code base and can't wait 2 weeks for things to stabilize.
2) As a library author you really want to release an update that allows for exceptions to 0.6

I am curious what the case is and if introducing cabal freeze could help out.

Greg Weber