Bitrotted Makefile in Cabal directory #1171

Closed
bmillwood opened this Issue Jan 8, 2013 · 5 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
4 participants
@bmillwood
Contributor

bmillwood commented Jan 8, 2013

There's a Makefile in the Cabal subdirectory that contains the wrong version and references stuff that has been deleted for years (e.g. tests/ModuleTest.hs).

Does anyone know why it's there? Has anyone used it since 2008?

@bmillwood

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@bmillwood

bmillwood Jan 8, 2013

Contributor

(While we're on the subject of strange files that haven't been touched in ages, what's with DefaultSetup.hs? git log --follow says not touched since 2008).

Contributor

bmillwood commented Jan 8, 2013

(While we're on the subject of strange files that haven't been touched in ages, what's with DefaultSetup.hs? git log --follow says not touched since 2008).

@bmillwood

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@bmillwood

bmillwood Jan 8, 2013

Contributor

I think DefaultSetup.hs should have been removed with 21dc557 , and now serves no purpose.

Contributor

bmillwood commented Jan 8, 2013

I think DefaultSetup.hs should have been removed with 21dc557 , and now serves no purpose.

@23Skidoo

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@23Skidoo

23Skidoo Jan 11, 2013

Member

Does anyone know why it's there? Has anyone used it since 2008?

I've never used it or DefaultSetup.hs. Maybe @dcoutts knows?

Member

23Skidoo commented Jan 11, 2013

Does anyone know why it's there? Has anyone used it since 2008?

I've never used it or DefaultSetup.hs. Maybe @dcoutts knows?

@bmillwood

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@bmillwood

bmillwood Jan 13, 2013

Contributor

As I mention in #1180, the Makefile is currently the only way, as far as I can see, of building the docs. I suggest someone more in the know slims it down a bit, so that that is /all/ it does. Alternatively, if we want to install some hooks so that it actually gets built and installed with the API docs, we could get rid of the Makefile altogether.

I like the idea of binning the Makefile – we're developing a build system here, it's a bit of a cop-out to use someone else's. But at the moment there's no way to say "building the docs requires Pandoc, but building the library doesn't". Perhaps it's better (or simpler, at least) to keep it that way and keep the Makefile (although we could still, if we wanted, include the user's guide pre-compiled with the source distribution, and install it in a post-haddock hook).

Contributor

bmillwood commented Jan 13, 2013

As I mention in #1180, the Makefile is currently the only way, as far as I can see, of building the docs. I suggest someone more in the know slims it down a bit, so that that is /all/ it does. Alternatively, if we want to install some hooks so that it actually gets built and installed with the API docs, we could get rid of the Makefile altogether.

I like the idea of binning the Makefile – we're developing a build system here, it's a bit of a cop-out to use someone else's. But at the moment there's no way to say "building the docs requires Pandoc, but building the library doesn't". Perhaps it's better (or simpler, at least) to keep it that way and keep the Makefile (although we could still, if we wanted, include the user's guide pre-compiled with the source distribution, and install it in a post-haddock hook).

@ttuegel ttuegel added this to the Cabal-1.24 milestone Apr 23, 2015

@23Skidoo 23Skidoo modified the milestones: Cabal 1.24, Cabal 1.26 Feb 21, 2016

@ezyang ezyang modified the milestone: Cabal 2.0 Sep 6, 2016

@ezyang ezyang closed this in 798470a Sep 8, 2016

@ezyang

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@ezyang

ezyang Sep 8, 2016

Contributor

This discussion misses one important function of the makefile: it's part of the release process. So we'll keep it.

Contributor

ezyang commented Sep 8, 2016

This discussion misses one important function of the makefile: it's part of the release process. So we'll keep it.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment