Re: Plans for GHC 6.12.1: release candidate 14 September 2009
On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 04:34:24PM -0400, Ravi Nanavati wrote: Hypothetically speaking (since I haven't made the call yet), if I wanted to be an early adopter of 6.12.1 when it is released, would now would be the time to start grabbing HEAD and playing with it There are currently some known problems with make install, so I would recommend waiting for the RC to be announced. Thanks Ian ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: Plans for GHC 6.12.1: release candidate 14 September 2009
Hypothetically speaking (since I haven't made the call yet), if I wanted to be an early adopter of 6.12.1 when it is released, would now would be the time to start grabbing HEAD and playing with it (so that I know what I'm probably getting into and can offer early feedback)? Or would it be better for me to wait for the release candidate for that (since external packages and the like might be an issue at this point)? Thanks, - Ravi On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 10:03 AM, Ian Lynaghig...@earth.li wrote: Hi all, This is a summary of our plans for GHC 6.12.1. We are aiming to have the first release candidate out on the 14th September 2009. Until then, we plan to focus on the bugs in the 6.12.1 milestone, marked high priority; they are listed here: http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/query?status=newstatus=assignedstatus=reopenedpriority=highestpriority=highmilestone=6.12.1order=priority If there is a bug not in that list that is important to you, please let us know. Thanks Ian ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: Plans for GHC 6.12.1: release candidate 14 September 2009
Ian Lynagh wrote: We are aiming to have the first release candidate out on the 14th September 2009. Until then, we plan to focus on the bugs in the 6.12.1 milestone, marked high priority; they are listed here: http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/query?status=newstatus=assignedstatus=reopenedpriority=highestpriority=highmilestone=6.12.1order=priority If there is a bug not in that list that is important to you, please let us know. Could you please merge ticket #3084: allow macros to redefine builtin GHCi commands http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/3084 It was agreed for 6.12.1 and the solution is attached. The solution did not result in any merge conflicts when I updated ghc.head a week ago. It did not cause any new errors in the validate script. I use it locally from the time the ticket was opened and I'm not aware of any problems. You might also consider ticket #3434: improve vi tags (add non-exported symbols, add tag kinds, add regex tags) http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/3434 There is a link to the solution from the ticket but this one is not approved. It does not result in any new errors in the validate script. But the solution may have impact on emacs tag generation and I tested the tags for emacs only in vim (vim recognizes them too). Thanks, Peter. ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: Plans for GHC 6.12.1: release candidate 14 September 2009
On 19/08/2009 10:15, Peter Hercek wrote: Ian Lynagh wrote: We are aiming to have the first release candidate out on the 14th September 2009. Until then, we plan to focus on the bugs in the 6.12.1 milestone, marked high priority; they are listed here: http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/query?status=newstatus=assignedstatus=reopenedpriority=highestpriority=highmilestone=6.12.1order=priority If there is a bug not in that list that is important to you, please let us know. Could you please merge ticket #3084: allow macros to redefine builtin GHCi commands http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/3084 It was agreed for 6.12.1 and the solution is attached. The solution did not result in any merge conflicts when I updated ghc.head a week ago. It did not cause any new errors in the validate script. I use it locally from the time the ticket was opened and I'm not aware of any problems. You might also consider ticket #3434: improve vi tags (add non-exported symbols, add tag kinds, add regex tags) http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/3434 There is a link to the solution from the ticket but this one is not approved. It does not result in any new errors in the validate script. But the solution may have impact on emacs tag generation and I tested the tags for emacs only in vim (vim recognizes them too). Sounds ok to me. If the patch goes in, I can do a quick test of :etags under emacs. Cheers, Simon ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: Plans for GHC 6.12.1: release candidate 14 September 2009
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 07:00:08PM +0200, Matthias Kilian wrote: On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 03:03:43PM +0100, Ian Lynagh wrote: This is a summary of our plans for GHC 6.12.1. We are aiming to have the first release candidate out on the 14th September 2009. Until then, we plan to focus on the bugs in the 6.12.1 milestone, marked high priority; they are listed here: http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/query?status=newstatus=assignedstatus=reopenedpriority=highestpriority=highmilestone=6.12.1order=priority Would it be better if I break my stable build slave in favor of the head build slave then? Yes please; the HEAD is what we're focussing on at the moment, and the next release will be from the (not yet created) 6.12 branch. Thanks Ian ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Plans for GHC 6.12.1: release candidate 14 September 2009
Hi all, This is a summary of our plans for GHC 6.12.1. We are aiming to have the first release candidate out on the 14th September 2009. Until then, we plan to focus on the bugs in the 6.12.1 milestone, marked high priority; they are listed here: http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/query?status=newstatus=assignedstatus=reopenedpriority=highestpriority=highmilestone=6.12.1order=priority If there is a bug not in that list that is important to you, please let us know. Thanks Ian ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: Plans for GHC 6.12.1: release candidate 14 September 2009
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 03:03:43PM +0100, Ian Lynagh wrote: This is a summary of our plans for GHC 6.12.1. We are aiming to have the first release candidate out on the 14th September 2009. Until then, we plan to focus on the bugs in the 6.12.1 milestone, marked high priority; they are listed here: http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/query?status=newstatus=assignedstatus=reopenedpriority=highestpriority=highmilestone=6.12.1order=priority Would it be better if I break my stable build slave in favor of the head build slave then? IIRC, I've to tweak some environment variables to make head build again, but it would break the stable builds. Ciao, Kili -- _|_ is pronounced 'bottom', and is the greatest lower bound of a complete lattice. -- Nick Williams in comp.lang.functional ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
