On 26/08/2009 22:32, Duncan Coutts wrote:
On Wed, 2009-08-26 at 17:15 +0100, Simon Marlow wrote:
* Sometimes we want to make local modifications to INDEPENDENT
libraries:
- when GHC adds a new warning, we need to fix instances of the
warning in the library to keep the GHC build warning-free.
I have to say I think this one is rather dubious. What is wrong with
just allowing warnings in these independent libs until they get fixed
upstream? I know ghc's build system sets -Werror on them, but I don't
see that as essential, especially for new warnings added in ghc head.
True, we don't have to do that.
Experience with Cabal and bytestring has shown that (1) can work for
INDPENDENT libraries, but only if we're careful not to get too
out-of-sync (as we did with bytestring). In the case of Cabal, we never
have local changes in our branch that aren't in Cabal HEAD, and that
works well.
It requires an attentive maintainer to notice when people forget to push
upstream (as they inevitably do on occasion). If it goes unnoticed for
too long then ghc ends up with a forked repo that cannot sanely be
synced from the upstream repo (like bytestring).
I suggest if we stick with the independent repo approach that we have
some automation to check that changes are indeed getting pushed
upstream.
Agreed. Can you think of an easy way to automate it?
Cheers,
Simon
_______________________________________________
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
