4 ms·
Right, modeled after, but I'm wondering why they would be considered failures. Rubygems and cabal both work really well for me, and cabal is both the nicest pa
by tsuraan 16y ago
Right, modeled after, but I'm wondering why they would be considered failures. Rubygems and cabal both work really well for me, and cabal is both the nicest package management system and the nicest build system I've ever used. I'd love to know why somebody would call it a failure.
- jsrn 16y agowith "failed attempts to copy" I meant they (Rubygems, Hackage, ...) did not succeed (yet?) to replicate the size, diversity, test coverage, community etc. of CPAN. I do agree that they are useful. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
- zaphar 16y agoYou obviously have never tried to compile profiling binaries for a haskell I would not call cabal the nicest build system I had used. Cpan beats the pants off it.