On 9 August 2011 14:32, Ian Lynagh <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 09:16:44PM +0000, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote: >> | > Or is the patch only in the upstream Cabal? In which case, it should be >> pulled >> | into the GHC repos before committing, no? Else validate fails. >> | >> | No I learnt from my mistake last time (I hope so anyway!) and manually >> | sync'd our lagging Cabal with upstream after pushing the patch. >> >> Aha! So I didn't do that! Ian, what's the protocol? Should David push to >> the lagging GHC Cabal repo under circumstances like this? If he manually >> syncs his own copy, he's going to succeed in validating while the rest of us >> fail. > > I think David means he's pushed the patches to our lagging repo, so > everything should be working.
Yes this is what I mean. > > If there's a patch missing from somewhere, can someone tell me which > patch, where it is, and where it's missing from please? Afaik everything is fine. Cheers, David _______________________________________________ Cvs-ghc mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ghc
