[darcs-users] darcs patch: Import cabalisation: Setup.lhs, darcs.ca... (and 13 more)

[Eric Kow]

On Sat, Oct 18, 2008 at 15:14:25 -0400, David Roundy wrote:
> I think this is an overstatement.  I'd still rather keep packaging out of
> the official darcs repository on the whole.  I know that we do have a
> darcs.spec.in file in release/, but the debian stuff has been removed, and
> in release/ it's out of the way.  Perhaps we could put the darcs.cabal in
> the same place?

Well, that would be a bit of an inconvenience to everybody that wants to
use the Cabal file.  I would prefer we just kept it in the repository
root.

> We don't have a gentoo ebuild in the official darcs repository, and I
> don't see a strong reason why we should add one.  Why is cabal any
> different?

I understand that you see Cabal as just a packaging system among others,
and I would like to propose a slight nuance to add to your view.

Cabal files exist to make packaging darcs easier: cabal-install,
MacPorts, Debian, RedHat, ArchLinux, Gentoo, Cygwin all could benefit
from having a single reference point for our Haskell package dependency
information.  Providing an official Cabal file makes it easier for a
diverse group of packagers to install darcs and indirectly makes it
easier for people to install darcs, which is a very good thing for the
community.

In other words, the nuance consists is separating the discussion on the
merits of Cabal from that of cabal-install.  Hackage/cabal-install can
be seen as a packaging system among others (Gentoo, etc), and I can
understand your resistance to giving it any special treatement.  Cabal
itself on the other hand, should become part of darcs, because it allows
us to help lots of different people package darcs for very little cost.

As a separate issue, I personally think we should also make some effort
to ensure that "cabal install darcs" works... and the reason for doing
this is that it validates our cabal file and gives packagers confidence.

> I'd rather see changes move into darcs in a gradual, incremental manner.
> I'm likely to accept a reasonable darcs.cabal file, but please make it a
> single patch.

Ok.  I hope my next patch is more reasonable.

-- 
Eric Kow <http://www.nltg.brighton.ac.uk/home/Eric.Kow>
PGP Key ID: 08AC04F9
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 194 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.osuosl.org/pipermail/darcs-users/attachments/20081019/caccd392/attachment.pgp