Re: heads-up: Haskell updates

[Ricardo Wurmus]

Timothy Sample <address@hidden> writes:

> Unfortunately, I don’t know enough about Haskell to comment on whether
> or not these packages “really shouldn’t be overridden” or not.  (It
> makes sense to me, but OTOH, why are they all split up and on Hackage if
> not for tinkering?)  If they really shouldn’t be overridden, then we
> should stop doing so!

They shouldn’t be overridden, because of problems like this.  They are
offered on Hackage for developers to play with them, but there is no
guarantee that all packages will work with the new versions.

That’s precisely why there are efforts like Stackage / LTSHaskell.  They
agree on one version of GHC and harmonize package versions that work
well together.

There are much fewer packages that work with the latest version of some
module than there are packages that would break.  But worst of all is a
mix of old and new modules, because that is very likely to cause
problems.

I have, in fact, already removed some packages from the inputs of
Haskell packages as I prepared this big batch of updates.  More work
like that should be performed.

--
Ricardo

GPG: BCA6 89B6 3655 3801 C3C6  2150 197A 5888 235F ACAC
https://elephly.net