Bump bytestring dependency upper bound to < 0.12

[SamuelSchlesinger]

Found myself needing this bumped to build a project.

[Bodigrim]

Ping @hvr

[Bodigrim]

CC @phadej @chessai
This is holding many packages downstream. Is there anything I can help with to get it merged and revised on Hackage?

[chessai]

CC @phadej @chessai
This is holding many packages downstream. Is there anything I can help with to get it merged and revised on Hackage?

Reached out to gershom for hackage rights

[phadej]

What? Is this package takeover? There is clear procedure for that. You can also ask Hackage Trustees to make a revision.

I'm neither the maintainer of hashable nor Hackage Trustee, so I cannot help here.

... but, what the fuck?

[chessai]

Oops, my bad. Thought this was under haskell/. I will ask for gershom to not go through with my request.

…

On Sun, Dec 6, 2020, 11:51 Oleg Grenrus ***@***.***> wrote: What? Is this package takeover? There is clear procedure for that. You can also ask Hackage Trustees to make a revision. I'm neither the maintainer of hashable nor Hackage Trustee, so I cannot help here. ... but, what the fuck? — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#191 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AEOIX2656YQ77LKQ4NXYIODSTPACFANCNFSM4SLS5VRQ> .

[chessai]

@gbaz could you make a hackage revision for this?

[phadej]

Also since when packages under haskell GitHub organization are under any other policy, then what the individual packages may have?

Does this mean that CLC oversees changes in e.g. base16-bytestring and base64-bytestring now too? ping @emilypi

[chessai]

Also since when packages under haskell GitHub organization are under any other policy, then what the individual packages may have?

Does this mean that CLC oversees changes in e.g. base16-bytestring and base64-bytestring now too? ping @emilypi

No, CLC does not. Formally, if this were under haskell/, CLC would be overstepping bounds to help maintain. But there are recent cases of non-CLC-owned packages (such as with bytestring and text) where CLC has stepped in to stop the stalling of packages due to lack of maintenance, and weighted importance of those packages. But, because this is not within haskell/ org, I would definitely leave this to maintainers (and/or hackage trustees for bumping version bounds). It was an honest mistake that I thought this was under haskell/.

[gbaz]

@chessai the right way to get the bound changed is to open an issue at https://github.com/haskell-infra/hackage-trustees/issues

[chessai]

@chessai the right way to get the bound changed is to open an issue at https://github.com/haskell-infra/hackage-trustees/issues

request to make the revision opened: haskell-infra/hackage-trustees#287

[emilypi]

@phadej no, the CLC does not maintain the base encoding libraries. They happen to be under the haskell github umbrella because it was a historical dumping ground for unwanted packages (namely - bos' and a few others). I really think we need to clear up policy on this, because we shouldn't be identifying "core" with "critical to the Haskell ecosystem". "Core" only means GHC boot libraries and a few peripherals, NOT general "everyone uses these so now the CLC has eminent domain".

I am on the CLC and maintain base16-bytestring and base64-bytestring, but the CLC does maintain them.

[chessai]

@phadej no, the CLC does not maintain the base encoding libraries. They happen to be under the haskell github umbrella because it was a historical dumping ground for unwanted packages (namely - bos' and a few others). I really think we need to clear up policy on this, because we shouldn't be identifying "core" with "critical to the Haskell ecosystem". "Core" only means GHC boot libraries and a few peripherals, NOT general "everyone uses these so now the CLC has eminent domain".

I agree with this. It was overstepping bounds to ask for personal maintainership rights. Although I only wanted to bump version bounds, this should always be for the maintainer/trustees to do. I wasn't really thinking about it when I asked, and I apologise. Didn't mean to seem like I was initiating a hostile package takeover.

And the thing I said about bytestring/text - these are boot libraries, and have critical mass, so it seemed natural/not harmful to have CLC put effort toward them. So, to clarify about earlier comments, I wouldn't do this for any library under haskell/.

[phadej]

I'll look around at issues and will make a release ASAP. Thank you for your patience.