Add support for Cabal-syntax #254

patrickdoc · 2021-09-15T02:29:22Z

Add support for new Cabal-syntax library: haskell/cabal#7620

The only reference to Cabal I didn't know how to remove was the CPP here: https://github.com/haskell/hackage-security/blob/master/hackage-security/tests/TestSuite.hs#L18

phadej · 2021-10-15T08:23:18Z

example-client/example-client.cabal

+ if flag(use-cabal-syntax)
+ build-depends: Cabal-syntax >= 3.7 && < 3.8
+ else
+ build-depends: Cabal >= 1.12


this should have also && <3.7 to make the flag selection options mutually exclusive

phadej · 2021-10-15T08:23:52Z

hackage-repo-tool/hackage-repo-tool.cabal

+ else
+ build-depends: Cabal >= 1.14 && < 1.26
+ || >= 2.0 && < 2.6
+ || >= 3.0 && < 3.4


Excluding 3.6 on purpose?

Not intentional, just naively cut-pasted from the existing constraints, updated now.

phadej · 2021-10-16T06:15:59Z

@Mikolaj would it make sense to commit recent revisions (https://hackage.haskell.org/package/hackage-security-0.6.0.1/revisions/) into the repository?

Mikolaj · 2021-10-16T06:18:41Z

@Mikolaj would it make sense to commit recent revisions (https://hackage.haskell.org/package/hackage-security-0.6.0.1/revisions/) into the repository?

Absolutely. If nobody does it, I will do this before a release (probably early next week?).

Mikolaj

As far as I understand the context, LGTM.

phadej · 2021-10-16T06:22:36Z

hackage-repo-tool/hackage-repo-tool.cabal

@@ -84,6 +85,13 @@ executable hackage-repo-tool
 else
 build-depends: network >= 2.5 && < 2.6

+ if flag(use-cabal-syntax)
+ build-depends: Cabal-syntax >= 3.7 && < 3.8


Sorry I overlooked this: it's better to leave the bound <3.9 (here and elsewhere), so we don't need to do revisions right after the Cabal(-syntax)-3.8 is released.

@phadej: ping?

phadej · 2021-10-27T09:42:27Z

hackage-repo-tool/hackage-repo-tool.cabal

+ else
+ build-depends: Cabal >= 1.14 && < 1.26
+ || >= 2.0 && < 2.6
+ || >= 3.0 && < 3.7


phadej · 2021-10-27T09:42:40Z

hackage-security/hackage-security.cabal

+ else
+ build-depends: Cabal >= 1.14 && < 1.26
+ || >= 2.0 && < 2.6
+ || >= 3.0 && < 3.7


and this still have <3.7

This logic is trying to handle the split, so for:

< 3.7, use Cabal

>= 3.7, use Cabal-syntax

Is that the wrong version to split on?

@phadej: ping? :)

Oh I see, nevermind.

Is that the wrong version to split on?

Not really. It's a bit unfortunate as the sections are not mutually exclusive. There could be install-plan with Cabal-syntax-3.7 and Cabal-3.5, so the flag value selection is arbitrary.

This could be problematic, e.g. something which uses old Cabal version still, then the solver will pick the Cabal-syntax-3.7 dependency for hackage-security. And then weird things might happen as e.g. download has PackageIdentifier in its type. Downstream would expect one from Cabal-3.5, but hackage-security would have Cabal-syntax-3.7 one.

A solution to this is to release a dummy Cabal-syntax-3.6 which would depend on Cabal <3.7 and use its version to get mutual exclusive branches. The similar example is https://hackage.haskell.org/package/network-uri-2.5.0.0 but I think it's wrong as network-uri-2.5.0.0 doesn't depend on network we have to write:

if flag(network-uri) build-depends: network-uri >= 2.6, network >= 2.6 else build-depends: network-uri < 2.6, network < 2.6

but we would like (in our case) to be able to omit the "network" from the newer branch:

if flag(network-uri) build-depends: network-uri >= 2.6 else build-depends: network-uri < 2.6, network < 2.6

I.e. we would write

if flag(Cabal-syntax) build-depends: Cabal-syntax >= 3.7 && < 3.9 else build-depends: Cabal-syntax <3.7, Cabal >= 1.12 ...

I'm very tired now, please check that I didn't any mistake in my reasoning.

... and I would rename the flag to just Cabal-syntax. It's common to just use the package name.

If I understand flags correctly, assuming we have some package foo that depends on Cabal-3.5 and the updated hackage-security, then the solver will return Cabal-3.5 and Cabal-syntax-3.7. And the maintainer of foo would need to work around that?

Perhaps it would be more user friendly to flip the default so that hackage-security will use Cabal < 3.7 and the dummy Cabal-syntax-3.6 unless newer versions are specifically requested (Cabal >= 3.7 or Cabal-syntax >= 3.7)?

In either case, what's the preferred path for generating the dummy cabal-syntax?

If nobody objects, I will help to set that in motion.

phadej

@Mikolaj don't ping me, if it looks good to you, go for it. The more I look at this the more small things I find even in this small patch.

phadej · 2021-11-03T17:41:26Z

hackage-repo-tool/hackage-repo-tool.cabal

@@ -39,6 +39,10 @@ flag use-old-time
 description: Are we using @old-time@?
 manual: False

+flag use-cabal-syntax
+ description: Are we using Cabal-syntax?
+ manual: False


Please specify the default. I never remember which one is a default.

phadej · 2021-11-03T17:41:41Z

example-client/example-client.cabal

+ if flag(use-cabal-syntax)
+ build-depends: Cabal-syntax >= 3.7 && < 3.9
+ else
+ build-depends: Cabal >= 1.12 && < 3.7


I probably got confused because this section doesn't look like all others.

But this is just an example, so no need to change

phadej · 2021-11-03T17:41:49Z

hackage-security/hackage-security.cabal

+ else
+ build-depends: Cabal >= 1.14 && < 1.26
+ || >= 2.0 && < 2.6
+ || >= 3.0 && < 3.7


Oh I see, nevermind.

Mikolaj · 2021-11-03T18:09:09Z

I will wait for a fixed point or a cyclic alternation and then merge. :)

Mikolaj · 2021-11-29T09:57:14Z

I guess we reached the fixed point. @patrickdoc: what would we start with? Could we spell out the plan so that @phadej may correct us?

Mikolaj · 2021-12-29T14:55:58Z

The plan is that I merge soon and release new hackage-security. Bound should guarantee that it won't break 3.6.* nor any earlier cabals when it releases. Changes in cabal will follow.

#256 Edit: and I will commit recent revisions (https://hackage.haskell.org/package/hackage-security-0.6.0.1/revisions/) into the repository first.

Edit2: and, as @fendor pointed out, we probably need to release the dummy Cabal-syntax package first (it turns out not to be released) --- do we get this right or has the plan changed?

Mikolaj · 2021-12-29T15:54:55Z

@patrickdoc: re "I update the hackage-security pr to fix the bounds in the flag" from Matrix/IRC, I thought they are already correct in the PR?

patrickdoc mentioned this pull request Sep 15, 2021

Create Cabal-syntax for .cabal parsing and types haskell/cabal#7620

Merged

3 tasks

patrickdoc force-pushed the cabal-syntax branch from adc9b5d to ea3baba Compare September 17, 2021 00:14

phadej reviewed Oct 15, 2021

View reviewed changes

Mikolaj self-requested a review October 15, 2021 13:39

patrickdoc force-pushed the cabal-syntax branch from ea3baba to 83aba08 Compare October 16, 2021 01:16

Mikolaj approved these changes Oct 16, 2021

View reviewed changes

phadej reviewed Oct 16, 2021

View reviewed changes

patrickdoc force-pushed the cabal-syntax branch from 83aba08 to b1a28ee Compare October 23, 2021 02:04

phadej reviewed Oct 27, 2021

View reviewed changes

phadej reviewed Nov 3, 2021

View reviewed changes

patrickdoc force-pushed the cabal-syntax branch from c7333a1 to 8b2087a Compare January 22, 2022 14:58

Add support for Cabal-syntax

c717313

patrickdoc force-pushed the cabal-syntax branch from 8b2087a to c717313 Compare January 22, 2022 15:05

Mikolaj merged commit c747849 into haskell:master Jan 22, 2022

Mikolaj mentioned this pull request Aug 13, 2022

New Cabal-syntax and an ancient Cabal conflict in a single package (e.g., old hackage-repo-tool on Hackage used both a new Cabal-syntax and ancient Cabal) haskell/cabal#8370

Open

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Add support for Cabal-syntax #254

Add support for Cabal-syntax #254

patrickdoc commented Sep 15, 2021

phadej Oct 15, 2021

patrickdoc Oct 16, 2021

phadej Oct 15, 2021

patrickdoc Oct 16, 2021 •

edited

Loading

phadej commented Oct 16, 2021

Mikolaj commented Oct 16, 2021

Mikolaj left a comment

phadej Oct 16, 2021

patrickdoc Oct 23, 2021

Mikolaj Oct 27, 2021

phadej Oct 27, 2021

phadej Oct 27, 2021

patrickdoc Oct 31, 2021 •

edited

Loading

Mikolaj Nov 3, 2021

phadej Nov 3, 2021

phadej Nov 3, 2021 •

edited

Loading

phadej Nov 3, 2021

patrickdoc Nov 6, 2021

Mikolaj Nov 29, 2021

phadej left a comment

phadej Nov 3, 2021

phadej Nov 3, 2021

phadej Nov 3, 2021

Mikolaj commented Nov 3, 2021

Mikolaj commented Nov 29, 2021

Mikolaj commented Dec 29, 2021 •

edited

Loading

Mikolaj commented Dec 29, 2021

Add support for Cabal-syntax #254

Add support for Cabal-syntax #254

Conversation

patrickdoc commented Sep 15, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

patrickdoc Oct 16, 2021 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

phadej commented Oct 16, 2021

Mikolaj commented Oct 16, 2021

Mikolaj left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

patrickdoc Oct 31, 2021 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

phadej Nov 3, 2021 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

phadej left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Mikolaj commented Nov 3, 2021

Mikolaj commented Nov 29, 2021

Mikolaj commented Dec 29, 2021 • edited Loading

Mikolaj commented Dec 29, 2021

patrickdoc Oct 16, 2021 •

edited

Loading

patrickdoc Oct 31, 2021 •

edited

Loading

phadej Nov 3, 2021 •

edited

Loading

Mikolaj commented Dec 29, 2021 •

edited

Loading