On Jun 8, 2011, at 11:08 AM, Tom Murphy wrote:
On 6/7/11, James Cook <[email protected]> wrote:
[...]
The name of the field could be better, though. On first exposure,
people tend to think "stability: experimental" or "stability:
unstable" means the package is likely to crash (For those who don't
know, it means the API is likely to change in future releases).
What is the way to indicate actual code stability? Some packages on
Hackage definitely have "broken parts."
Since all cabal fields are set before uploading that would imply
someone is uploading something they know to be broken, which doesn't
seem right. But assuming some legitimate reason exists, WARNING or
DEPRECATED pragmas on the bad stuff would probably be a good way to go.
-- James
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
