RE: Cabal package descriptions
On 10 February 2005 12:54, Ross Paterson wrote:
I think we need an extra field Synopsis for a short summary of the package, possibly supplemented by the longer Description. This should make Hackage catalogues more readable, and could also be shown by an extended form of hc-pkg list.
(repeated) License and License-File should not be mutually exclusive. They're both useful, for different purposes. Perhaps License would be more accurately called License-Type.
Perhaps Hidden-Modules should be renamed Other-Modules, now that it is used by both libraries and executables.
I more or less agree with all this, but it's too late to get any API changes into 6.4 now. We might have to start thinking about backwards compatibility. Cheers, Simon
On Thu, Feb 10, 2005 at 03:33:48PM -0000, Simon Marlow wrote:
I more or less agree with all this, but it's too late to get any API changes into 6.4 now. We might have to start thinking about backwards compatibility.
There's a dissonance between the need to ship GHC and the unfinished state of Cabal. Most of the interface is worked out, but there are a few parts (not the parts currently used by GHC) that are experimental and/or need fixing, and these have had very little user feedback. I think this will be a beta release for Cabal, and its interface will need changing soon. What to do? Independent releases of Cabal updates?
participants (2)
-
Ross Paterson -
Simon Marlow