Yeah.  I think that idea was ok&#39;d by all. <div><br></div><div><span></span><br><br>On Wednesday, February 26, 2014, Daniel Trstenjak &lt;<a href="mailto:daniel.trstenjak@gmail.com">daniel.trstenjak@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><br>
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 03:18:45PM +0200, Michael Snoyman wrote:<br>
&gt; Even with that flag, we&#39;d still have a bit of a problem. It would be nice if<br>
&gt; cabal could ignore an upper bound on template-haskell, but respect an upper<br>
&gt; bound on some other package that *can* be installed with a newer GHC. Perhaps<br>
&gt; adding that flexibility to cabal would be possible.<br>
<br>
I think that&#39;s a call for soft bounds (known to work with) and hard<br>
bounds (known to not work with) and the flag &#39;--allow-newer&#39; would be<br>
only allowed to overwrite the soft bounds.<br>
<br>
<br>
Greetings,<br>
Daniel<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Libraries mailing list<br>
<a href="javascript:;" onclick="_e(event, &#39;cvml&#39;, &#39;Libraries@haskell.org&#39;)">Libraries@haskell.org</a><br>
<a href="http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries" target="_blank">http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries</a><br>
</blockquote></div>