[darcs-users] enfranchising darcs?

David Roundy droundy at darcs.net
Fri Oct 17 22:09:35 UTC 2008

On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 10:05:43PM +0100, Ganesh Sittampalam wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Oct 2008, David Roundy wrote:
>>>> 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.
>> It's what the cabal docs say to do.  Maybe that's a bug in the cabal
>> documentation?
> Ah, I think I was confused then. I'm not particularly familiar with cabal 
> myself; I was under the impression that you had to use the cabal library  
> to work with it properly, but it seems that's wrong.

Well, it's not what the documentation claims, anyhow.

>>>> 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.
>> Well, perhaps you should bring that up with the cabal folks.  If you
>> create a cabal file, cabal install will obey that cabal file, that's
>> what cabal install does, and is why franchise can be installed with
>> cabal install.  Admittedly franchise has a pretty cruddy cabal file,
>> but that's because it's automatically generated and I haven't had the
>> motivation to do any better.
> OK, so perhaps we can just drop in a proper .cabal file for darcs and  
> that'll be it - though that would place a burden on franchise to support  
> the entire Cabal command-line interface (the one documented at  
> http://www.haskell.org/ghc/docs/latest/html/Cabal/builders.html), and to  
> track updates to it, which looks like it might be rather onerous.

It's trickier than that, since cabal install relies on undocumented
command-line flags.  But it seems that the cabal folks are interested
in documenting them, so hopefully that will improve.


More information about the darcs-users mailing list