cvs commit: ports/archivers/hs-zip-archive Makefile distinfo pkg-descr pkg-plist ports/devel/hs-binary Makefile distinfo pkg-descr pkg-plist ports/devel/hs-darcs/files patch-Setup.lhs patch-darcs.cabal ports/devel/hs-darcs Makefile distinfo pkg-d

[Gabor PALI]

On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 12:05 AM, Dmitry Marakasov <amdmi3 at amdmi3.ru> wrote:
> What's the purpose for renaming them at all?

All of them are transcripts of Cabal packages coming from HackageDB [1].


> In the first place, those are end-user applications named darcs, xmonad etc.

And some of them are applications as well.  I would like to achieve a
consistent naming to see what is coming from there and what is not.
(For example, lang/pugs, deskutils/checkrdf or devel/lhs2TeX are not
from there but still written in Haskell).  As a next step, I would
like to port Haskell Platform [2] to FreeBSD, so the users can decide
whether they want to use hackages from ports or simply use HP and use
cabal-install to add packages.  These two alternatives would be
mutually exclusive since using cabal-install interferes with the Ports
Collection.

Using FreeBSD ports has its usual advantages (binary install, correct
dependencies, things build out-of-the-box, etc.), while using HP would
mean a direct access to the "bleeding edge" of Haskell software with
compilation from sources and a risk that packages might not build.


> should be named darcs and xmonad correspondingly, regardless of
> language they're written in and regardless of whether they install
> modules for that language.

Sorry that I did not discuss this idea in front of a larger audience
in advance.  I thought (perhaps I was wrong) that these ports are not
used by so many users, so it is an acceptable cost.  Of course, I am
happy to have comments on the subject, I am very interested in the
generic feedback.


Cheers,
:g

[1] http://hackage.haskell.org/
[2] http://hackage.haskell.org/platform/