OK. Will you (Ben) create the ghc-7.6 branch? In future I guess Ian can do so when he forks.
Simon | -----Original Message----- | From: Ben Lippmeier [mailto:b...@ouroborus.net] | Sent: 06 December 2012 12:41 | To: Simon Peyton-Jones | Cc: Ian Lynagh; cvs-ghc@haskell.org list; Manuel M T Chakravarty | Subject: Re: GHC 7.6 failes to build | | | 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
