Haskell platform was released with the latest stable GHC (7.0.4 of course).

Guys, what's happening with haskell support in Arch?

Xmonad, and now GHC and lots of packages in the supported repos are
not keeping update with upstream.

On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 11:31:09AM +0100, Jelle van der Waa wrote:
[...]
>
> Btw adopted xmonad,xmonad-contrib, these packages will be updated today.

Excellent, then I can stop building these for myself. Are you
considering adding xmonad-extras too, or should I go ahead and add
that to [haskell] instead?

/M

--
Magnus Therning OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4
email: magnus@therning.org jabber: magnus@therning.org
twitter: magthe http://therning.org/magnus


Perl is another example of filling a tiny, short-term need, and then
being a real problem in the longer term.
-- Alan Kay

On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 09:53:40AM +0100, Jelle van der Waa wrote:
[...]
> What are the real troubling haskell packages? Only GHC,
> haskell-platform and XMonad?

I'm not sure any of them are troubling. This is my view on it:

- GHC is a big package, but Vesa is doing a good job keeping it
up-to-date. Currently it *looks* like it lagging behind upstream,
but that's caused by a strange move to use an even/release version
number for a tech-preview release.
- IMNSHO HP doesn't have a place in Arch, it should be dropped and
instead the individual packages should be updated as new versions
are available. See a recent discussion on the ArchHaskell mailing
list.
- Xmonad is far from troubling, it just needs an update that for some
reason have been overlooked.

/M

--
Magnus Therning OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4
email: magnus@therning.org jabber: magnus@therning.org
twitter: magthe http://therning.org/magnus


Perl is another example of filling a tiny, short-term need, and then
being a real problem in the longer term.
-- Alan Kay

On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 11:53:29AM +0100, Jelle van der Waa wrote:
> On 18/12/11 11:48, Magnus Therning wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 11:31:09AM +0100, Jelle van der Waa wrote:
> > [...]
> >>
> >> Btw adopted xmonad,xmonad-contrib, these packages will be updated today.
> >
> > Excellent, then I can stop building these for myself. Are you
> > considering adding xmonad-extras too, or should I go ahead and add
> > that to [haskell] instead?
> >
> > /M
> >
> Hmm didn't follow the mailing list about xmonad-extras. If it's easy to
> build and doesn't need real strange dependencies I could add it. Does it
> bring nice new features ?

It's straight forward to build. It required no modules that weren't
already in [haskell] (I haven't checked that for [community] though).

ATM there's only one thing I'm using from it in my setup:

XMonad.Actions.Volume:
http://hackage.haskell.org/packages/archive/xmonad-extras/0.10.1/doc/html/XMonad-Actions-Volume.html

Adding it to [haskell] takes less than a minute so I don't mind adding
it there :-)

/M

--
Magnus Therning OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4
email: magnus@therning.org jabber: magnus@therning.org
twitter: magthe http://therning.org/magnus

I invented the term Object-Oriented, and I can tell you I did not have
C++ in mind.
-- Alan Kay

On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 11:31:09AM +0100, Jelle van der Waa wrote:
[...]
> Btw adopted xmonad,xmonad-contrib, these packages will be updated
> today.

When building xmonad-extras against these updated packages I noticed
that you didn't include a version compiled with profiling enabled
(maybe not such an important thing to have though), nor did you
include any haddock documentation (that might be a useful thing to
include).

/M

--
Magnus Therning OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4
email: magnus@therning.org jabber: magnus@therning.org
twitter: magthe http://therning.org/magnus

I invented the term Object-Oriented, and I can tell you I did not have
C++ in mind.
-- Alan Kay

On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 12:11:40PM -0800, Ethan Schoonover wrote:
> 2011/12/20 Cédric Girard <girard.cedric@gmail.com>
>
>> On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 4:11 AM, Ethan Schoonover
>> <es@ethanschoonover.com> wrote:
>>
>>> 2. Always avoid AUR Haskell packages (they are mostly out of date)
>>
>> I'm not sure about this. First I find this unrespectful to the
>> people spending time maintaining Haskell PKGBUILDs in the AUR (and
>> I'm not saying this before I do).
>>
>
> No disrespect intended; this comes directly from the arch-haskell
> mailing list:
> http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/arch-haskell/2011-November/001744.html
>
> Their point is specifically that many AUR haskell packages are not
> at all maintained. I'm sure there are some that are, but until this
> cull is complete or a "whitelist" of AUR haskell packages shows up,
> I don't know which AUR haskell packages those would be.

The cull is complete. I've orphaned *all* haskell packages on AUR
that were owned by the archhaskell user.

>> Second, my own experience lead me to disable [haskell] repository
>> on my computers because some packages were out of date but where
>> picked before AUR ones by the aur helper I use.
>
> Hence the confusion around this issue. If Haskell AUR packages are
> indeed being deprecated then is [haskell] now more of a definitive
> source or is it *also* not well maintained?

I'd say it's fairly well maintained. There are always going to be
issues with tracking Hackage due to

1. The frequency of updates being uploaded to Hackage.
2. The dependencies of packages.
3. The decision to stick to HP in Arch [extra]/[community].

The amount of recompilation necessary in [haskell] is a bit daunting,
but unfortunately necessary. This means that if you can offer access
to a *fast* build machine then that'd be very useful. Even more
useful would an automated build machine be; some place where source
packages could be uploaded to be built.

> Take a look at that thread I link to in this mail, hopefully it will
> clarify my inclusion of the avoid AUR position in the rough package
> selection heuristic.

/M

--
Magnus Therning OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4
email: magnus@therning.org jabber: magnus@therning.org
twitter: magthe http://therning.org/magnus


Perl is another example of filling a tiny, short-term need, and then
being a real problem in the longer term.
-- Alan Kay

On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 12:00:12AM +0100, Cédric Girard wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 9:48 PM, Magnus Therning wrote:
>
> > >> Second, my own experience lead me to disable [haskell] repository
> > >> on my computers because some packages were out of date but where
> > >> picked before AUR ones by the aur helper I use.
> > >
> > > Hence the confusion around this issue. If Haskell AUR packages are
> > > indeed being deprecated then is [haskell] now more of a definitive
> > > source or is it *also* not well maintained?
> >
> > I'd say it's fairly well maintained.
>
> Well maybe my experience on this is not the latest. Last time I
> tried [haskell] was some months ago and I believe there was some
> changes in the arch-haskell team since.
>
> Anyway some of the old arch-haskell PKGBUILDs in the AUR have been
> adopted since the mass orphan and I think the situation will get
> better there as maintenance will be spread among more people.

I on the other hand suspect it won't get much better at all :-) There
is a real risk that having several maintainers will result in packages
that, while they are up-to-date, don't play well together.

/M

--
Magnus Therning OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4
email: magnus@therning.org jabber: magnus@therning.org
twitter: magthe http://therning.org/magnus

Most software today is very much like an Egyptian pyramid with
millions of bricks piled on top of each other, with no structural
integrity, but just done by brute force and thousands of slaves.
-- Alan Kay