[darcs-users] enfranchising darcs?

Ganesh Sittampalam ganesh at earth.li
Fri Oct 17 20:29:46 UTC 2008


On Fri, 17 Oct 2008, David Roundy wrote:

> On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 3:12 PM, Ganesh Sittampalam <ganesh at earth.li> wrote:
>> On Fri, 17 Oct 2008, David Roundy wrote:
>>> Cabalization of darcs is like debianization of darcs or rpmization of
>>> darcs.  It's  a good idea, but should be independent of darcs' build
>>> system.
>>
>> Could franchise's script be renamed from setup.hs to something else, to
>> avoid colliding with the name used by cabal?
>
> We could certainly rename the script, but since it strives to match
> the interface specified by cabal.

What's the benefit in matching the command-line interface? Unless it will 
integrate properly with cabal-install etc it seems more likely to cause 
confusion than anything else.

> Perhaps I should rename it to Setup.hs instead? Honestly, I only made it 
> lowercase because I don't like typing capital letters... (harder on the 
> wrists).  Naming the franchise script Setup.hs ought to make 
> cabalization almost trivial, for one definition of cabalization...

I don't think that would fit in with the way cabal does things. Unless we 
can figure out how to make the two fit together properly and still get the 
benefits of cabal (most importantly, the explicit dependency declaration), 
it would seem better to keep them apart.

Cheers,

Ganesh



More information about the darcs-users mailing list