Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=517144
Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED
Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE
--- Comment #11 from Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> 2009-08-31 23:20:53 EDT
---
Anyway thanks for picking up the haskell-platform -
I hadn't been following and it is starting to make sense now.
(In reply to comment #8)
Are they the same version?
Good question - sure we need to keep the package in sync with haskell-platform.
Personally, i'd rather deliver as many libraries via
subpackages anyways.
Hmm, well I thought about this too - weighing the effort of
separate packages with the complexity of haskell-platform subpackages.
Anyway we seems to have started going down the separate package
path which which should be good and fine as long as we are
careful to preserve version: I'll add a comment about haskell-platform
in the spec file and suggest we do the same for all packages
that form a part of Platform.
(In reply to comment #9)
Is the tarball from hackage then? Some of the tarballs Bryan used
came from the
platform tarball and for some reason did not checksum properly. It was the only
problem we found, and for the matter of speed, i let it slide, as the reviewer.
That is a no-no really - either we use the hackage packages or
the haskell-platform tarball I don't think we should mix them
- presumably all haskell-platform packages are available as
separate tarballs since haskell-platform also is distributed
without them.
--
Configure bugmail:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.