>You can protect against dependencies breaking by adding upper limits As every sane system does. So again, why are you acting like this is a haskell thing? >

>You can protect against dependencies breaking by adding upper limits As every sane system does. So again, why are you acting like this is a haskell thing? >but that doesn't fix the problem Yes it does. >every time someone makes a breaking change in a library API, everyone using that library needs to check through what actually changed to see whether it affects their particular situation That is the case no matter what. If I write an SSL application in C, I need to pay attention if a new version of openssl comes out. Once again, this isn't even remotely a haskell issue. >but I don't think it is helpful for mainstream industrial development You are not required to update to every new version that is released. If you do not want to track the bleeding edge then don't. That's why we have upper bounds.