Closed 414owen closed 2 years ago
I've performed the revision: https://hackage.haskell.org/package/functor-infix-0.0.5/revisions/.
Since the maintainer seems not to be active on GitHub, I've notified them via email about the revision.
Thanks @sjakobi
@sjakobi would you be able to regenerate / reupload the docs for functor-infix
?
They're pretty messed up. Mathjax is interpreting $$$$
as... something weird, in the type signatures.
I've regenerated the docs locally, and they've fixed the issue, so it would be great to get the hackage docs updated.
@414owen I don't want to invest much time into this since it currently seems unlikely that this package will have many users due to its current bounds.
I can delete the current haddocks and trigger regeneration, although I'm not sure whether there are any preconditions for me as a Hackage trustee to do this.
Did you even check whether the latest EDIT: I see you did.haddock
gives better output at all?
Since the maintainer seems not to be active on GitHub, I've notified them via email about the revision.
Unfortunately my emails to vi@computational.law and me@vikramverma.com could not be delivered.
@414owen, just in case the maintainer remains unreachable, would you be willing to take over maintainership?
@andreasabel Yes, I can take over maintainership.
Great, @414owen ! This is the takeover procedure: https://wiki.haskell.org/Taking_over_a_package
If you cannot contact the author/maintainer
- Try to contact the maintainer. Give him/her reasonable time to respond.
- State your intention to take over the package in a public forum (we recommend the haskell-cafe and/or libraries list). CC the maintainer.
- Wait a while.
- Send an email to the hackage administrators (hackage-admin@haskell.org), with a link to the public email thread.
The admins will grant you maintenance rights or upload a patched version for you.
From time of announcement of intention to takeover to actual takeover, there will be a 2-6 week period where the admins give the maintainer a chance to respond, with the exact time in any case up to the discretion of the admins.
Hmm, looking at a reverse dependency lookup, it seems that functor-infix
only has one hackage package depending on it that isn't owned by vi
.
There might be some non-hackage packages too, like GRIN, but I've PRed GRIN to use composition-extra
instead.
I suggest that, instead of a maintainership takeover, we add an unmaintained message to the hackage docs of functor-infix
, and link people to composition-extra
. This will lead to a less fragmented ecosystem. I don't think it's unreasonable. It's quite an easy migration to composition-extra
.
Sounds good. Doing takeover procedure isn't worth it, I suppose, to revive a fringe package.
Prior art: https://github.com/haskell-infra/hackage-trustees/issues/202
The package seems to load fine with GHC 8.10.2, but not GHC 9.x:
The author is unresponsive. See https://github.com/fmap/functor-infix/issues/4
Could we maybe update the bounds to
base >= 4.7 && < 4.15, template-haskell >= 2.8 && < 2.16
?The docs on hackage are also pretty messed up. They render weirdly, and the type signatures are wrong. The type signature of
<$$>
should be(<$$>) :: (Functor f1, Functor f2) => (a -> b) -> f1 (f2 a) -> f1 (f2 b)
. If it's not too much of a hassle, would a trustee be able to regenerate/reupload the hackage docs?For people who stumble upon this issue, I recommend checking whether
composition-extra
provides what you need.It's a lot less likely to break, as it doesn't use TH. It works with GHC {8,9}.*, whereas functor-infix only works with GHC 8.*.