simonpj:
> Don, Duncan
>
> As you know, we're planning to produce GHC 6.10 with "batteries not
> included", relying on the Haskell Platform for the batteries. We are
> working v hard to get 6.10 ready for release-candidate on 19 Sept.
>
> But http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Haskell_Platform seems dormant;
> it has not been modified for a month. So I'm a bit worried that we'll
> produce GHC but it won't have any batteries!
>
> Can you let us know what your plans are, esp concerning timescale?
> The steps under "Next steps" look fine... but they need be executed.
> Are you planning a release candidate, which people can try against the
> release candidate GHC?
>
> I know that you want to decouple the GHC release from the HP release.
> But if there was to be, say, a three month delay then there really
> would not be much point in running fast to ship GHC... we might
> instead re-plan our release cycle.
>
> Sorry if all this is in hand and I've simply missed it.
>
> Simon
>
A draft "meta package" for the platform is here,
http://code.haskell.org/haskell-platform/haskell-platform.cabal
This would allow us to:
cabal install haskell-platform
and use cabal to track dependencies.
The question is on what to include. I'd say, start with the current
extra libs, and throw in the 5 most popular others (say, Data.Binary,
an XML library, a JSON library, and some other parsers).
>From this, we can announce a draft, and work on scaling up the automated
quality assurance aspects.
Duncan, what do you think?
_______________________________________________
Cvs-ghc mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ghc
