Hi Mateusz, I remember your email and I believe I responded with the OK at the time - my impression was that it was ready to be merged and would shortly be done after that, but I didn't hear anything back about it. I apologize for my dropping the ball.
As for your actual error - ghc-paths is only used in Haddock when it's not built in the GHC tree (as per the cabal file,) so I find it very suspicious that your package check is mentioning it at all (it's not mentioned anywhere else in any GHC sources.) Can you verify that it's there with `./inplace/bin/ghc-pkg list`? I'm not even sure how it could possibly get involved. Finally, can you be more specific about exactly how you tested these changes with your modified Haddock? I presume it was something like: $ ... clone ghc source ... $ cd ghc $ ... get extra stuff with ./sync-all ... $ cd utils/haddock $ ... use git to grab your code from github ... $ cd ../.. $ sh ./validate But I'd like to make sure I know exactly what's going on. I can try testing your branch later today. On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 4:29 AM, Mateusz Kowalczyk <[email protected]> wrote: > On 07/01/14 10:20, Simon Peyton Jones wrote: >> | David stepped down and Simon Marlow has a long time ago too! It is now >> | Simon Hengel who maintains it. >> >> OK, well perhaps you can immediately push a change to haddock.cabal to >> reflect this? That's how we know. > > I will try later but I think I don't have permissions. I can at best > push to Simon's branch where he would periodically push to the GHC > hosted repository (or perhaps it would get pulled from, I do not know). > >> >> | Is it by now too late for 7.8? I'm afraid Simon H is away without much >> | access to technology until the 20th. >> >> Realistically that would push 7.8 RC to the end of Jan. Why would that be >> better than pushing to head just after the 7.8 release? Will 7.8 users see >> a big improvement if it was in? What do others think? > > The changes were mostly there for user benefit. The markup can now be > escaped much better. If we can validate what's on Simon's new-parser > branch reasonably quickly, we might even be able to push in the new > features: new mark up, nested paragraphs, better lists, headers… I'm > trying to push for 7.8 because Haddock ships with GHC and 7.8 is the > stable release that everyone will be using in couple of months time. If > the changes don't get into 7.8, we'll have to wait for the next stable > release for the users to benefit. Is this incorrect? I was always under > the impression that the only Haddock releases we can reasonably make are > with stable GHC releases. Of course, anyone can compile HEAD and > generate the docs for their own viewing but for example, Hackage will > run stable compiler and all the docs will still be using old Haddock. > > I'd love to hear that I'm wrong about this and that Haddock releases > separate from GHC are possible but I don't think that's the case. > >> >> S >> > > > -- > Mateusz K. > _______________________________________________ > ghc-devs mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs > -- Regards, Austin Seipp, Haskell Consultant Well-Typed LLP, http://www.well-typed.com/ _______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
