On 05/28/2010 05:11 PM, Alexander Rødseth wrote:
Thanks for a well-written post, Peter.
2010/5/27 Ionut Birubiru.firstname.lastname@example.org:
do you want to became a TU and maintain correctly in community?
They way things are done in AUR, where packages are orhpaned and then maintained by volunteers, is a system that seems to work. The quality of the AUR packages can be so-so, but they don't go unmaintained or broken for long if there are enough people that care. I'm sure there are more than enough people that care about Haskell, as it is an alluring language that carries with it a promise to be theoretically sound.
Changing the focus from finding a general solution to what Peter might choose to do does not seem construcive to me. Not handling Haskell-packages in a special non-maintained way would be more constructive. I don't think a one-man-army Arch Haskell Team will improve the situation, no matter how clever that person may be.
Best regards, Alexander Rødseth
now that i'm looking again of my comment, is not quite clear about what i'm talking.
he said that some packages in extra are quite out of date and broken in a way and then he said about haskell support in arch is deteriorating rapidly. i guess that if you want to fix this issues, then is better to became a TU to improve haskell in arch.