On 11/01/2011, at 21:41, Iavor Diatchki wrote: > If GHC and the libraries on which it depends were in git (migrated, or > mirrored), then we could use git sub-modules to track the dependencies > between changes to GHC and changes to the libraries. > > Roughly, the workflow would be like this: > 1. Make a change to the library and commit it. > 2. Make a change to GHC. > 3. Make a GHC commit which records the change and the dependency on the > commit in the library repository.
What about dependencies which go the other way? Actually, the dependency is often mutual: the GHC change won't work without the library change and the library change won't work without the GHC change. Does git support this? > This is useful because when someone gets the changes to GHC, they would know > that they need to update their library as well (and there is tool support to > make all updates automatically). This kind of dependency is not at all > obvious with our current workflow. IMO, darcs-all works pretty well. I don't think I ever really had problems with missing library patches. > The same method works for going back to a previous state of the project, > where one can "rewind" the libraries to their old versions too. This would be useful. Unfortunately, git's rewinding seems rather crippled compared to darcs. Roman _______________________________________________ Cvs-ghc mailing list Cvs-ghc@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ghc
