On 04 January 2005 19:11, Isaac Jones wrote:
And I meant <package> rather than "package" :-)
As Ross pointed out, one problem with that is finding the file itself. It also sorta violates the "don't repeat yourself" principal of keeping data in sync.
Most of these objections are addressed by simply saying that the basename of <package>.hsproj is irrelevant. It doesn't have to be the same as the package name, but by convention it makes sense for it to do so when possible. For the purposes of Cabal, it can be ignored. Why not just say that the package description is contained in a single file with a .hspkg or .hsproj suffix in the same directory as Setup.lhs? That covers all the cases we need right now, and it's a simple rule to describe. Cheers, Simon