I won't bother to look it up, since it's not important and we probably agree on basically everything, but there were in my memory quite a few tempests in teapots about this sort of thing. It wasn't that there were other…
It was almost entirely quotations from you, I guess you can't remember them.
www.haskell.org didn't used to take for granted that ghc is 'the' official haskell implementation. If you look at https://web.archive.org/web/20090129200859/http://haskell.or... which immediately lists implementations…
You said, > The people involved have been the ones artificially creating the problem by refusing to follow established community standards (the package versioning policy) and > The tool does not fix real problems. It…
That wasn't your argument at all. I know and constantly affirmed that many people do and have removed upper bounds, and that I myself oppose it. Your 'argument' is the absurd falsification that this practice was…
It's not empty of content, it is devastating to your argument. Check out the upper bounds among these packages http://hackage.haskell.org/user/BryanOSullivan e.g. http://hackage.haskell.org/package/wreq ... there are…
It's clear that you weren't around then and don't have the historical knowledge necessary to have a view about this. This isn't stopping you from spreading absurd libels.
The question is historical. I think you can't have been making your immense industrial build in the years immediately preceding `Wed Aug 15 14:54:44 UTC 2012` when `yesod` signed on to Brian O'Sullivan's plan of…
You keep repeating the claim that `stack` exists in order to solve a problem deliberately created by the FPComplete crowd. This is frankly a really disturbing lie that has nothing to do with reality or the actual order…
This totally rewrites history. The idea of scrapping upper bounds was introduced by Brian O'Sullivan https://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-cafe/2012-August/... whereupon it was adopted by yesod as you can see by…
I won't bother to look it up, since it's not important and we probably agree on basically everything, but there were in my memory quite a few tempests in teapots about this sort of thing. It wasn't that there were other…
It was almost entirely quotations from you, I guess you can't remember them.
www.haskell.org didn't used to take for granted that ghc is 'the' official haskell implementation. If you look at https://web.archive.org/web/20090129200859/http://haskell.or... which immediately lists implementations…
You said, > The people involved have been the ones artificially creating the problem by refusing to follow established community standards (the package versioning policy) and > The tool does not fix real problems. It…
That wasn't your argument at all. I know and constantly affirmed that many people do and have removed upper bounds, and that I myself oppose it. Your 'argument' is the absurd falsification that this practice was…
It's not empty of content, it is devastating to your argument. Check out the upper bounds among these packages http://hackage.haskell.org/user/BryanOSullivan e.g. http://hackage.haskell.org/package/wreq ... there are…
It's clear that you weren't around then and don't have the historical knowledge necessary to have a view about this. This isn't stopping you from spreading absurd libels.
The question is historical. I think you can't have been making your immense industrial build in the years immediately preceding `Wed Aug 15 14:54:44 UTC 2012` when `yesod` signed on to Brian O'Sullivan's plan of…
You keep repeating the claim that `stack` exists in order to solve a problem deliberately created by the FPComplete crowd. This is frankly a really disturbing lie that has nothing to do with reality or the actual order…
This totally rewrites history. The idea of scrapping upper bounds was introduced by Brian O'Sullivan https://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-cafe/2012-August/... whereupon it was adopted by yesod as you can see by…