| > > 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?). | | Right, I didn't branch them as we don't use them in the stable branch. | But I can make the branches for future stable branches if that's useful, | no problem.
I'm not quite getting this. For all three (random, vector, DPH), are they used at all in the 7.6 branch? * If not, that's fine, but we must advertise that 7.6 doesn't work with DPH. I think that's ok... 7.8 will come soon with DPH stuff. * If so, we should surely test them in the 7.6 branch, and that means tagging them, doesn't it? Do we build 'vector' solely because of DPH? I think so. Is the same true of 'random'? Simon _______________________________________________ Cvs-ghc mailing list Cvs-ghc@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ghc
