This is a wonderful idea. Apart from the nostalgia factor, I think newsreaders are much better equipped to deal with big streams of information than any algorithmic time.
Yes and no. After making and using Illuminant for a while, I feel like I want to read everything, which is not the usual way to consume “Twitter-likes”, so I can’t follow too many people, or the newsreader-interface feels overwhelming.
It might just be me, though, back when Twitter existed I also wanted to read everything, and was annoyed by the interface, having to remember how far to (doom)scroll down.
Wow, I don’t see many Haskellers using the Debian provided compiler. I use Debian myself, so I’d be in the target demography, but I prefer to just use GHCup to install the development tools. This seems to be a trend across languages (RustUp is another example).
I am a big fan of stability, so I can see why you’d want to avoid the latest features. Nothing wrong with being compatible with older compilers. But I just see a lot of mistrust regarding the distro packaging. In the Haskell ecosystem, especially around Arch. Nowadays, it seems more conservative to actually avoid the distro packaging. Except for languages like C, where I think most people will prefer the system toolchain.
I’d love to hear the argument for using distro packaging. And what about all the Fedora users? Are they expected to search for the package names, or would you expect them to just use GHCup?
Sorry to go off a tangent, it just really caught my eye.
I guess this is OT but your comment led me to click on through to TFA at least…
Debian developer and Haskeller here (but not a packager of any Haskell stuff in Debian). It’s not just the compiler that’s the problem, the nature of Haskell means if you go with the system compiler you’re also pretty much bound to the system libraries and their versions as well. At least I think that’s how it works.
GHC has the concept of ‘boot libraries’, see version history. Some of the boot libraries are overridable, others are not: e.g. the version of version of base and template-haskell are fixed for each GHC release/version. But the vast majority of dependencies are typically not boot libraries. Since cabal-install v1.24 from 2016 (search for “Tech preview of new nix-style isolated project-based builds” in changelog) you have been able to install separate versions for each project. Documentation for a current version of cabal-install is available at how-to-build-like-nix.html.
A similar feature is available in stack, but I am not sure since when. (possibly it always had this feature)
Stackage is of particular interest because I’ve seen distributions use the Stackage to decide the versions they ship. So if your distro is downstream of Stackage, why not just use Stackage directly?
In my case the answer is just that I have used and known Debian for a long time, so I feel I have an idea of how upgrades, security issues and such are handled. I happen to not have the same relationship with Stackage, and I’m not sure what I would get out of going down that route, when the path I am on works for me.
I wouldn’t describe myself as a Haskeller - I am a beginner at Haskell, and I just want a basic environment that works. I don’t have a need to run the newest, latest version of package X, Y, or Z.
I prefer being in the comforting surroundings of Debian packages, rather than having to faff with finding the right compiler, installing it, pointing all the tools to it etc. etc. I am always baffled by tutorials that start with “Install the bleeding edge version by downloading a personal copy of everything”, that’s not my definition of “easy”, easy is “apt install” :-)
With regards to people not running Debian, contributing what is needed to compile is up to them. On Debian, at least, if you do not install all the libghc-*-dev packages, cabal will happily download and compile from Hackage. I expect the same to be the case for all the Fedora users.
I’ve never tried GHCup, so I don’t know what the experience going down that route is.
Cool idea! Multi-protocol projects like this are neat when not merely a bridge between two systems.
This is a wonderful idea. Apart from the nostalgia factor, I think newsreaders are much better equipped to deal with big streams of information than any algorithmic time.
Yes and no. After making and using Illuminant for a while, I feel like I want to read everything, which is not the usual way to consume “Twitter-likes”, so I can’t follow too many people, or the newsreader-interface feels overwhelming.
It might just be me, though, back when Twitter existed I also wanted to read everything, and was annoyed by the interface, having to remember how far to (doom)scroll down.
Wow, I don’t see many Haskellers using the Debian provided compiler. I use Debian myself, so I’d be in the target demography, but I prefer to just use GHCup to install the development tools. This seems to be a trend across languages (RustUp is another example).
I am a big fan of stability, so I can see why you’d want to avoid the latest features. Nothing wrong with being compatible with older compilers. But I just see a lot of mistrust regarding the distro packaging. In the Haskell ecosystem, especially around Arch. Nowadays, it seems more conservative to actually avoid the distro packaging. Except for languages like C, where I think most people will prefer the system toolchain.
I’d love to hear the argument for using distro packaging. And what about all the Fedora users? Are they expected to search for the package names, or would you expect them to just use GHCup?
Sorry to go off a tangent, it just really caught my eye.
I guess this is OT but your comment led me to click on through to TFA at least…
Debian developer and Haskeller here (but not a packager of any Haskell stuff in Debian). It’s not just the compiler that’s the problem, the nature of Haskell means if you go with the system compiler you’re also pretty much bound to the system libraries and their versions as well. At least I think that’s how it works.
GHC has the concept of ‘boot libraries’, see version history. Some of the boot libraries are overridable, others are not: e.g. the version of version of
baseandtemplate-haskellare fixed for each GHC release/version. But the vast majority of dependencies are typically not boot libraries. Since cabal-install v1.24 from 2016 (search for “Tech preview of new nix-style isolated project-based builds” in changelog) you have been able to install separate versions for each project. Documentation for a current version of cabal-install is available at how-to-build-like-nix.html.A similar feature is available in stack, but I am not sure since when. (possibly it always had this feature)
Stackage is of particular interest because I’ve seen distributions use the Stackage to decide the versions they ship. So if your distro is downstream of Stackage, why not just use Stackage directly?
In my case the answer is just that I have used and known Debian for a long time, so I feel I have an idea of how upgrades, security issues and such are handled. I happen to not have the same relationship with Stackage, and I’m not sure what I would get out of going down that route, when the path I am on works for me.
I wouldn’t describe myself as a Haskeller - I am a beginner at Haskell, and I just want a basic environment that works. I don’t have a need to run the newest, latest version of package X, Y, or Z.
I prefer being in the comforting surroundings of Debian packages, rather than having to faff with finding the right compiler, installing it, pointing all the tools to it etc. etc. I am always baffled by tutorials that start with “Install the bleeding edge version by downloading a personal copy of everything”, that’s not my definition of “easy”, easy is “apt install” :-)
With regards to people not running Debian, contributing what is needed to compile is up to them. On Debian, at least, if you do not install all the libghc-*-dev packages, cabal will happily download and compile from Hackage. I expect the same to be the case for all the Fedora users.
I’ve never tried GHCup, so I don’t know what the experience going down that route is.
Awesome! is there an existing server I can point my nntp client to test out?
https://illuminant.asjo.org/
You can also see some screenshots in the fediverse which can be found in the comments of https://koldfront.dk/just_call_me_mr_nntp_1871#comment1891
EDIT: Link to screenshots Add https://illuminant.asjo.org/user/asjo/object/71371
You’ll have to run it yourself - join the federated servers making up the fediverse! - I am not planning to host other people on my server :-)
Oh, I have no problem running an activity pub instance, and I host my own – https://gopinath.org/. I just wanted to see what it is like.