On 06/12/2012, at 23:19 , Simon Peyton-Jones wrote: > | The HEAD version of DPH might work with ghc-7.6 right now, but we don't > | expect it to in the future. > > there *is* no ghc-7.6 branch, so I had to use master.
I think there should be a ghc-7.6 branch for DPH. > So the question (for Ben, Manuel) is this: which branch of DPH should one use > with ghc-7.6? Maybe the answer is "none", in which case we can be careful > a) to ignore DPH when testing the ghc-7.6 branch > b) to tell users that they should not attempt to use DPH with ghc 7.6 > > Is that the idea? Or is there a version that should work? I think Ian should branch DPH along with the other libraries as part of the release process. From then on I'll test it with the current GHC version and ship it via Hackage as I've been doing. Ian doesn't have to wait for me once the branch has been made. > For vector and random the same questions apply, but since we simply have > lagging git repos for them we can create a ghc-7.6 branch. Did you > deliberately not do that, Ian? I expect Ian didn't branch DPH because it's not his job to test it with the GHC RC and ship it as part of the GHC source tarball. I can do the release part, but if Ian branches DPH as well then it is effectively zero-overhead to his existing workflow, and we won't hit this breakage again (I think?). Ian: let us know if you have a better idea for it. Ben. _______________________________________________ Cvs-ghc mailing list Cvs-ghc@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ghc
