Change recommendation: include generated cabal files

[snoyberg]

For details of the proposal, see the blog post: https://tech.fpcomplete.com/blog/storing-generated-cabal-files

If you are in favor of this change, please press thumbs up below. If you are opposed, please press thumbs down. Of course, feel free to include additional comments below.

[gromakovsky]

One problem with this approach that I encountered is that rebases become more painful. We have a repo with many packages, each one has package.yaml and we store .cabal files in the repo. If someone updates .cabal file(s) in master and you update something different in .cabal files in your branch by updating package.yaml and regenerating them (e. g. you both add a new dependency), you will get unnecessary conflicts because hpack adds a line with a hash.

It's not something critical, I just wanted to warn people about this inconvenience.

[cdornan]

I have been getting feedback from non-stack users complaining about repos with no cabal files. From their perspective it is frustrating so I am delighted with this proposal even if it might be a little more inconvenient. N retrospect Cabal files form the basis of the package system so it is better to include them directly.

[snoyberg]

OK, I'm going to move ahead with this. Thanks for the responses all. Closing as the discussion is done, will be merged to master fairly soon.