Hi Ben, Since part of the changes of https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/-/issues/14422 are already merged into master (e.g. we ignore the "type signature" part of a COMPLETE sig now, because there is nothing to disambiguate), it would be good if we merged the solution outlined in https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/-/issues/14422#note_321645, as that would allow users to switch to a new, better mechanism instead of discovering that COMPLETE signatures seemingly have been ripped of a feature. The problem with that is that it needs a GHC proposal, I think, and that's not written yet.
Also I hope to merge some efforts in the CPR area before the fork. But that's quite optional. Cheers, Sebastian Am Do., 4. Feb. 2021 um 19:56 Uhr schrieb Ben Gamari <b...@well-typed.com>: > > tl;dr. Provisional release schedule for 9.2 enclosed. Please discuss, > especially if you have something you would like merged for 9.2.1. > > Hello all, > > With GHC 9.0.1 at long-last out the door, it is time that we start > turning attention to GHC 9.2. I would like to avoid making the mistake > made in the 9.0 series in starting the fork in a state that required a > significant amount of backporting to be releaseable. Consequently, I > want to make sure that we have a fork schedule that is realistic given > the things that need to be merged for 9.2. These include: > > * Update haddock submodule in `master` (Ben) > * Bumping bytestring to 0.11 (#19091, Ben) > * Finishing the rework of sized integer primops (#19026, John Ericson) > * Merge of ghc-exactprint into GHC? (Alan Zimmerman, Henry) > * Merge BoxedRep (#17526, Ben) > * ARM NCG backend and further stabilize Apple ARM support? (Moritz) > * Some form of coercion zapping (Ben, Simon, Richard) > * Tag inference analysis and tag check elision (Andreas) > > If you see something that you would like to see in 9.2.1 please do > holler. Otherwise, if you see your name in this list it would be great > if you could let me know when you think your project may be in a > mergeable state. > > Ideally we would strive for a schedule like the following: > > 4 February 2021: We are here > ~4 weeks pass > 3 March 2021: Release branch forked > 1 week passes > 10 March 2021: Alpha 1 released > 3 weeks pass > 31 March 2021: Alpha 2 released > 2 weeks pass > 14 April 2021: Alpha 3 released > 2 weeks pass > 28 April 2021: Alpha 4 released > 1 week passes > 5 May 2021: Beta 1 released > 1 week passes > 12 May 2021: Release candidate 1 released > 2 weeks pass > 26 May 2021: Final release > > This provides ample time for stabilization while avoiding deviation from > the usual May release timeframe. However, this would require that we > move aggressively to start getting the tree into shape since the fork > would be less than four weeks away. I would appreciate contributors' > thoughts on the viability of this timeline. > > Cheers, > > - Ben > _______________________________________________ > ghc-devs mailing list > ghc-devs@haskell.org > http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs >
_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs