On Thu, May 31, 2007 at 09:12:48PM +1000, Manuel M T Chakravarty wrote: > > > >I'm not sure that working on a branch would help here. In a sense the > >build system work *is* being done in a branch - a private branch, and > >making the branch public wouldn't really help, because nobody else would > >be testing it. I suspect we'd have a similar batch of failures when the > >code was merged into the HEAD and tested in a wider variety of > >configurations than Ian can reasonably test on his own. Add to that the > >extra overhead of developing on a branch (with multiple repos) and I'd > >say this isn't the way forward. > > Maybe the work is on a branch, but it is pushed into the head frequently > enough that it doesn't make a difference.
FWIW I wasn't really aware that the HEAD was being frequently broken by build system changes. Pretty much everything since the mass push (that broke building in trees with unbuildable libraries (which I didn't think to test)) has been to fix a problem, I think. > And I don't agree that a > public branch wouldn't help. A public branch with a call for wider > testing at points where you think it actually works would get it at > least some testing before it hits everybody. OK, giving it a go :-) Thanks Ian _______________________________________________ Cvs-ghc mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ghc
