ghcup should have a DSL that allows to describe installations in an easy and expressible format. This will:
allow easier contribution
reduce code duplication and make maintenance easier
allows users to add their own tools easily and have them mixed into the main ghcup metadata
Package descriptions would continue to exist in the existing yaml format, but will be extended with DSL-like functionality, such as "unpack tarball". We won't allow arbitrary shell code like an actual package manager, since we don't have sandbox functionality... and most tools should be simple binaries only.
In GitLab by @maerwald on May 15, 2021, 17:46
Adding a new simple binary is a daunting task for potential contributors, as can be seen here: https://gitlab.haskell.org/haskell/ghcup-hs/-/merge_requests/88
ghcup should have a DSL that allows to describe installations in an easy and expressible format. This will:
Package descriptions would continue to exist in the existing yaml format, but will be extended with DSL-like functionality, such as "unpack tarball". We won't allow arbitrary shell code like an actual package manager, since we don't have sandbox functionality... and most tools should be simple binaries only.