Oleg Grenrus

I'm not attached to the name, any better suggestions? Maybe `phantom-depends`, is it any better?

@geekosaur no it won't. Proposed semantics for `fake-depends` / `phantom-depends` is that they add constraints on the packages, but **if those packages are not transitively needed by anything, they won't...

@sebright that is an option, but it could be quite confusing, as it would be different from the `cabal.project` one.

I'm somewhat surprising how much effect these flags have. But on the other hand, the affected tests seems to be the ones which we have GHC-version conditionals on them. So...

@arybczak I'd say that `-fdicts-cheap` has more impact than `-fdicts-strict`. I'm not sure what `-fdicts-cheap` does precisely, but it's different from `-funfolding-dict-discount`. I think it affects lambda-floating, e.g. one test...

Going into one direction have been intentional https://github.com/haskell/hackage-server/commit/9fcef7229ce655e53cc9cc2e88963ffc28447b6f, but I'd argue that revisions should always be reversible. So if `manual -> automatic` is considered bad for some reason than `automatic...

> is in that sense "safe", It's not "safe". Turn any automatic flag in https://hackage.haskell.org/package/transformers-compat-0.7.2 to be manual, and you will break some configurations. (Downstream would be required to flip...

I suggest that we ban flag manual automatic change. > Its something like going to manual makes things more configurable for users and is in that sense "safe", but going...

> then it may always "automatically" pick the option you don't want You can force automatic flag to the particular value too. I.e. **you can override** automatic selection. That what...

> but otherwise they're the same? At its simplest yes.