Edward, and core library colleagues, Any views on this? It would be good to make progress. Thanks Simon
From: ghc-devs [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Simon Peyton Jones Sent: 04 August 2014 16:01 To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected] Subject: Core libraries bug tracker Edward, and core library colleagues, This came up in our weekly GHC discussion * Does the Core Libraries Committee have a Trac? Surely, surely you should, else you'll lose track of issues. * Would you like to use GHC's Trac for the purpose? Advantages: o People often report core library issues on GHC's Trac anyway, so telling them to move it somewhere else just creates busy-work --- and maybe they won't bother, which leaves it in our pile. o Several of these libraries are closely coupled to GHC, and you might want to milestone some library tickets with an upcoming GHC release * If so we'd need a canonical way to identify tickets as CLC issues. Perhaps by making "core-libraries" the owner? Or perhaps the "Component" field? * Some core libraries (e.g. random) have a maintainer that isn't the committee. So that maintainer should be the owner of the ticket. Or the CLC might like a particular member to own a ticket. Either way, that suggest using the "Component" field to identify CLC tickets * Or maybe you want a Trac of your own? The underlying issue from our end is that we'd like a way to * filter out tickets that you are dealing with * and be sure you are dealing with them * without losing track of milestones... i.e. when building a release we want to be sure that important tickets are indeed fixed before releasing Simon
_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
