[Moving to the list, as it might be of interest to others]

Hi,

Am Montag, den 30.06.2008, 16:46 -0300 schrieb Marco Túlio Gontijo e Silva:

Em Seg, 2008-06-30 às 11:20 +0200, Joachim Breitner escreveu:

...

I think this is to make sure that the autobuilders will only build the package when they have an up-to-date ghc already, otherwise the generated package will be uninstallable once the ghc6 is up-to-date.

It might even be advisable to use strict dependencies for the various used haskell-libs. This is what haskell-utils is doing.

Then I think I should study a little bit more of haskell-utils to try to adapt it's new version to gtk2hs.

Sounds good. Until gtk2hs is cabalized you probably can’t use haskell-utils directly, but if you agree with it’s way of handling dependencies, you can adopt that of course.

I've asked about moving it to cdbs, do you think it's a good idea?

Personally, I see cdbs as the right tool for packages that build and install in a very standard way, i.e., if no or very little modification to the building has to be done, and I doubt that this applies to gtk2hs. OTOH, since you are stepping up as the maintainer of gtk2hs, if you prefer cdbs, you are welcome to use it, of course.

Maybe it'd be good to wait till I improve the deps --- or at least, keep the ghc6 dep the way it were.

You didn’t upload a package with an unversioned dependency on ghc6 yet, right? So I can upload that if you want, but if you prefer to work on the packaging yet some more, that’s fine with me.

Greetings, Joachim