Skip to content

Clarify role of ~/.cabal when determining config file. #10972

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

athas
Copy link
Collaborator

@athas athas commented May 30, 2025

This is purely a documentation change that makes the behaviour more explicit.

The actual behaviour is unchanged, although the need for a five step checklist to find the config file suggests that perhaps things have gotten a bit out of hand.

Template B: This PR does not modify behaviour or interface

E.g. the PR only touches documentation or tests, does refactorings, etc.

Include the following checklist in your PR:

  • Patches conform to the coding conventions.
  • Is this a PR that fixes CI? If so, it will need to be backported to older cabal release branches (ask maintainers for directions).

This is purely a documentation change that makes the behaviour more explicit.

The actual behaviour is unchanged, although the need for a five step checklist
to find the config file suggests that perhaps things have gotten a bit out of
hand.
@Mikolaj
Copy link
Member

Mikolaj commented May 30, 2025

Python is acting up. Let me restart the failed CI jobs.

@Mikolaj Mikolaj requested a review from Bodigrim May 30, 2025 14:02
Copy link
Member

@Mikolaj Mikolaj left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thank you.

Copy link
Collaborator

@ulysses4ever ulysses4ever left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Formally speaking, this should close #10713, which was a purely documentation inquiry. But I see an active discussion there, so up to you...

@geekosaur
Copy link
Collaborator

This is explicitly a follow-on to that issue, and is not a final solution as discussion continues about possibly simplifying the behavior.

@ulysses4ever
Copy link
Collaborator

@athas merge label?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants