Matthew Pickering

@grayjay I wrote down some thoughts about the design. https://hedgedoc.well-typed.com/PgXXnkI8TSqw2kioBD_FnQ# I would appreciate if you could have a look, the part I am stuck on is how to explain this...

* I think this example is not quite precise because `C` can't transitively depend on `B` as that would be a circular dependency which is already forbidden. I'm not sure...

> I mean solving everything unqualified, treating all `private-build-depends` in the whole dependency tree as regular `build-depends`, so at most one instance of each package/component is used. I don't think...

> > You can rename modules (simply) or for instantiations via mixins, or you can declare a private scope and all modules in that private scope will be prefixed with...

If anyone is interested, here is an example of what using private dependencies with the current patch looks like for testing multiple versions of `text` against each other, and benchmarking...

I think it's confusing that you can write ``` profiling: true profiling-detail:none ``` and this will result in everything being built with profiling enable but `profiling-detail` is only applied to...

The problem is that the compiler tries to unify `MkDTTy "S" [EArg (MkAb (MkAbFVar "\163$f6") (fromList []))]` and `MkDTTy "S" [EArg (MkAb (MkAbFVar "\163$f7") (fromList []))]`. This falls into the...

I think the testing approach described to me by Rodrigo sounds sensible. 1. Test all cabal.project files found in stackage packages => if they work then merge the PR 2....

If I understand correctly this will allow deleting `LegacyProjectConfig` and all those legacy types and associated conversion functions, that's great news if so. I will try to review this PR.

Here is a simple executable you can easily use to just test parsing of `cabal.project` files. https://gist.github.com/mpickering/9ac21a3730388d7260e7c0c50a80c290 Using `cabal get -s` is not the best workflow as many repo urls...