Say you've got a package webbrowser, which depends on libhttp The Haskell package versioning policy < http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Package_versioning_pol

Say you've got a package webbrowser, which depends on libhttp The Haskell package versioning policy < http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Package_versioning_policy http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Package_versioning_policy > says that your package metadata should specify a minimum and maximum bound on which version of libhttp you support; this way, if a new version of libhttp is released that is backwards-incompatible, they can bump the version and every dependent package will still build correctly. Say the author of libhttp realizes he really needs to add another parameter to a function. That might break dependents, so it's backwards-incompatible. So he bumps the version from 2.3 to 2.4. Like a good package author, your browser's dependencies look like this: name: webbrowser version: 1.0 build-depends: libhttp >= 2.3 && < 2.4 Now you can be notified of the change via < http://packdeps.haskellers.com/ http://packdeps.haskellers.com/ >, download his new package, test it, and verify it works. You didn't use that function, so the change doesn't apply to you. You can change your metadata to: build-depends: libhttp >= 2.3 && < 2.5 Except now there's a problem. Hackage doesn't support modifying already-uploaded packages; there's no way you can say "webbrowser-1.0 supports 2.3 and 2.4", because it already has a record for webbrowser-1.0. So you have to bump your version: version: 1.0.0.1 And re-upload. And your choice is 1) do this for every package and every dependency, or 2) ignore the versioning policy, hope no dependency changes break your packages. It sucks. The general feeling I get from core Haskell developers is that they work in finance, medical, or other fields where every dependency has to undergo a four-month certification process before it can be used. So they don't care about this, because they just never see it. But for somebody who just wants to publish his stuff online and let others use it, it's a goddamn nightmare. The other day, the developer of the 'text' package bumped his version to 0.11. As far as I can tell, it doesn't actually have any significant changes. All he did was fix an obscure edge condition when a particular function is passed invalid input. Everything that could build against 0.10, will build against 0.11. Since I followed the package versioning policy, most of my packages < http://packdeps.haskellers.com/feed/?needle=John+Millikin http://packdeps.haskellers.com/feed/?needle=John+Millikin > are set to refuse his new version. It's not too bad now, but sooner or later a user will upgrade their 'text' and then try to install one of my packages and then they will email me asking me why I am so mean and restrictive. Which means sometime in the next week or to, I need to sit down for a few hours and recompile all my stuff, then bump the versions, then commit and tag and sign and push and sdist and upload. And somewhere in that hour I'm going to be thinking about just removing the bounds check, and letting my users deal with whatever hell befalls them if in three years there is a real breaking change somewhere.