For documentation: Yes, this is planned for the near future (although a bit of back-and-forth with Haddock will be done first).
For replacing Hackage: Not yet. Flora.pm is right now focused on serving as a meta-index for many package repositories of the Haskell ecosystem, and flora-server will be able to be deployed to be a stand-alone package repo in the future, but no plan to replace Hackage has been devised yet, as the stability constraints are much, much stricter, and I still wish to experiment further with Flora.
I was wondering how does the namespacing functionality work, specifically whether the namespace is open to contributors/authors or curated. The single-namespace limitation of Hackage does not play well with the fact that Haskell packages are very long-lived (alternatively: “bitrot” can be fixed with little effort), so I think Flora can play a vital role in making the ecosystem more flexible.
The namespacing on flora.pm is curated to refer to package repositories (Hackage, Cardano, Horizon), which makes Flora a meta-index.
The single-namespace limitation of Hackage does not play well with the fact that Haskell packages are very long-lived (alternatively: “bitrot” can be fixed with little effort), so I think Flora can play a vital role in making the ecosystem more flexible.
I’m not too sure what you mean by this, but if you think of a model like npm, this is not going to be the case (yet?).
I’m not familiar with this aspect of npm, but yes I was thinking of cases of package handover/inheritance/abandonment (see: cryptonite): new authors would use the same package name but under their own namespace.
That would require too much of a paradigm change (and for cabal & co. to support namespaced packages), so I’m not focused on this right now. I prefer to improve the base experience first for a majority of people during their daily interactions. :)
Very nice! Will this include functionality to read documentation in the future?
Are there plans to make this official / replace the hackage frontend with this?
For documentation: Yes, this is planned for the near future (although a bit of back-and-forth with Haddock will be done first).
For replacing Hackage: Not yet. Flora.pm is right now focused on serving as a meta-index for many package repositories of the Haskell ecosystem, and flora-server will be able to be deployed to be a stand-alone package repo in the future, but no plan to replace Hackage has been devised yet, as the stability constraints are much, much stricter, and I still wish to experiment further with Flora.
Hi! Great progress, thank you for building this !
I was wondering how does the namespacing functionality work, specifically whether the namespace is open to contributors/authors or curated. The single-namespace limitation of Hackage does not play well with the fact that Haskell packages are very long-lived (alternatively: “bitrot” can be fixed with little effort), so I think Flora can play a vital role in making the ecosystem more flexible.
The namespacing on flora.pm is curated to refer to package repositories (Hackage, Cardano, Horizon), which makes Flora a meta-index.
I’m not too sure what you mean by this, but if you think of a model like npm, this is not going to be the case (yet?).
I’m not familiar with this aspect of npm, but yes I was thinking of cases of package handover/inheritance/abandonment (see: cryptonite): new authors would use the same package name but under their own namespace.
That would require too much of a paradigm change (and for cabal & co. to support namespaced packages), so I’m not focused on this right now. I prefer to improve the base experience first for a majority of people during their daily interactions. :)
Do you plan to integrate Cabal with Flora specific APIs somehow?
No need, cabal works with an overlay system that flora documents: https://flora.pm/documentation/namespaces