| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
=== Submitted for review === | === Submitted for review === | ||
[https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?product=Fedora&component=Package+Review&bug_status=NEW,ASSIGNED,NEEDINFO,MODIFIED&emailcc1=1&emailtype1=substring&email1=fedora-haskell-list%40redhat.com | [https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?product=Fedora&component=Package+Review&bug_status=NEW,ASSIGNED,NEEDINFO,MODIFIED&emailcc1=1&emailtype1=substring&email1=fedora-haskell-list%40redhat.com Package reviews] which are CC fedora-haskell-list. | ||
* utf8-string ([https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426750 bug 426750] ) | * ghc-utf8-string ([https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426750 bug 426750] ) | ||
* X11 ([https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426751 bug 426751] ) | * ghc-X11 ([https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426751 bug 426751] ) | ||
* X11-xft ([https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426752 bug 426752] ) | * ghc-X11-xft ([https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426752 bug 426752] ) | ||
* xmonad ([https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426753 bug 426753] ) | * xmonad ([https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426753 bug 426753] ) | ||
* xmonad-contrib ([https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426754 bug 426754] ) | * ghc-xmonad-contrib ([https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426754 bug 426754] ) | ||
* ghc-zlib | |||
* ghc-HTTP | |||
=== Other Potential packages === | === Other Potential packages === | ||
Revision as of 02:12, 10 November 2008
Haskell Special Interest Group
Mission
To encourage and guide the packaging of Haskell projects in Fedora.
Communication
Mailing list
We have a mailing-list fedora-haskell-list (archives ), since 13 Feb 2008.
IRC
Currently we do not have an independent IRC channel. Some members may be found on #fedora-devel or #haskell on Freenode.
Tasks
- Draft packaging guidelines for Haskell packages and libraries
- Naming: we have Cabal packages with names such as zlib. Should we call the corresponding Fedora package haskell-zlib to avoid conflicts? Should we use this convention for all Haskell-extension packages?
- Submit various commonly used libraries for Package Review
- srpm packages for DrIFT, X11, c2hs, cpphs, fps, hs-plugins, hscolour, hsh, hslogger, missingh, vty, wxhaskell, xmobar, xmonad at unsubmitted srpm packages are some good starting candidates
- also packaging with Bryan's cabal-rpm
- bootstrap ghc on ppc64 (bug 239713 )
- build ghc for EL-4 and EL-5
Submitted for review
Package reviews which are CC fedora-haskell-list.
- ghc-utf8-string (bug 426750 )
- ghc-X11 (bug 426751 )
- ghc-X11-xft (bug 426752 )
- xmonad (bug 426753 )
- ghc-xmonad-contrib (bug 426754 )
- ghc-zlib
- ghc-HTTP
Other Potential packages
- missingh
- HsColour
- vty
Current packages in Fedora
- alex
- curry
- darcs
- ghc
- gtk2hs (should probably be renamed to ghc-gtk2hs)
- haddock
- happy
- hugs98
Comments
I'm tinkering with cabal-rpm to make sure it can create *good* Fedora packages for most cabal files. I'm using zlib as a test spec in the review process to get a feel for the little nuances that cabal-rpm has to work out. I would really like to have a naming scheme decided on in some part. Once that step is out of the way, I think I can try to make rpms for most of the packages, and put them in a repo somewhere as a demo - YaakovNemoy
I've drafted up some packaging standards and a feature request - Yaakov Nemoy
SIG Members
- JensPetersen
- BryanSullivan
- GerardMilmeister
- JeremyHinegardner
- RichardJones
- TomMoertel
- MichelSalim
- PeterLemenkov
- YaakovNemoy
- MilesSabin
- RajeshKrishnan
Please add your name above if you want to help and contribute.