Re: HEADS UP! Re: darcs switchover
Nobody shouted, so I propose we throw the final switch now. If you have uncommitted patches in CVS, just move them over to a darcs tree and continue from there. Just to be clear, this is what's happening: - the darcs repositories listed at http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/GhcDarcs will be the main repositories for the GHC HEAD - changes from CVS will no longer be propagated to darcs (John, can you run that script one final time and then turn it off? Let's set the cutoff time for 1700 GMT today, if that's possible). - The 6.4 branch will remain in CVS, I'll be merging patches by hand until this branch comes to the end of its life after the 6.4.2 release. - commit mails for ghc, testsuite, and nofib are being sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] commit mails for all the packages are being sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (at some point I'll rename these lists, or at least set up aliases). Please join me in thanking John Goerzen for all his hard work in setting up these repositories. Cheers, Simon ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: darcs switchover
John Goerzen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Meanwhile, I noted that the HaXml repo on darcs.haskell.org seems to be a verbatim copy of the darcs repo at York. Ahh. You are correct. Re-converting now, since you've presumably committed patches to the darcs side, is probably not going to be practical. Actually, the way I have been working is to commit changes to CVS first, then to (forget to) propagate them into darcs. AFAIK, the two repositories are in synch right now, but if there is ever any discrepancy, I always treat the CVS one as correct. Thus, now would be an excellent time to re-convert, and I would then throw away my own darcs repo and switch to treating the darcs.haskell.org repo as the master. I can't remember where the rest of the ghc conversion process has reached - is it also about ready to switch over to darcs-as-master yet? Regards, Malcolm ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: darcs switchover
John Goerzen wrote: * I will re-convert all of the top-level directories in the current libraries darcs repo, except for: doc, mk, and Cabal * Each new repo will be under darcs.haskell.org/packages Inspired by the new browsable interface to the libraries repo at http://darcs.haskell.org/darcsweb/ I have installed a similar darcsweb interface for the software currently distributed through darcs at York: http://www.cs.york.ac.uk/fp/darcs/ including cpphs, hoogle, yhc, Blobs and so on. Meanwhile, I noted that the HaXml repo on darcs.haskell.org seems to be a verbatim copy of the darcs repo at York. This this right? I was slightly disappointed, since I think I made a bit of a mess of the CVS - darcs conversion of HaXml, and was secretly hoping that when the fptools conversion happened, it would make a cleaner job of it, based on the full CVS history... Just wondering? Regards, Malcolm ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: darcs switchover
On 2006-01-17, Malcolm Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Meanwhile, I noted that the HaXml repo on darcs.haskell.org seems to be a verbatim copy of the darcs repo at York. This this right? I was slightly disappointed, since I think I made a bit of a mess of the CVS - darcs conversion of HaXml, and was secretly hoping that when the fptools conversion happened, it would make a cleaner job of it, based on the full CVS history... Just wondering? Ahh. You are correct. I noticed that you had a HaXml repository, and believed that the copy in fptools was actually a converted-to-CVS version of that. In any case, I thought it would be unwise to have a darcs repo without common history with the upstream darcs repo, so indeed HaXml is just the fruit of darcs get from yours. Re-converting now, since you've presumably committed patches to the darcs side, is probably not going to be practical. -- John ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: darcs switchover
Ross Paterson wrote: On Fri, Jan 13, 2006 at 04:43:47PM +, Simon Marlow wrote: All of the packages are sync'd from CVS except for Cabal - it seemed more sensible to use the existing Cabal repo directly. However I've taken a branch of that Cabal repo to add the fptools Makefiles for now; the branch is in http://darcs.haskell.org/packages/Cabal. Is the plan that they eventually be merged (preferably as http://darcs.haskell.org/packages/Cabal)? Yes, either Isaac or I will do this shortly. Cheers, Simon ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: darcs switchover
On Sat, Jan 14, 2006 at 11:42:11AM -0600, T.C. Andrew wrote: After I completed the above procedure to get the source, and then $autoreconf $./configure $make the build always stuck at: ==fptools== make all -wr; in /login/haskell/public/ghc/ghc/compiler /bin/sh: line 0: test: 2.20051206: integer expression expected /bin/sh: line 0: test: 2.20051206: integer expression expected /bin/sh: line 0: test: 2.20051206: integer expression expected Any ideas? I am using Debian (testing). stuck as in make uses lots of CPU with no visible progress? If so, it sounds like http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=346248 Thanks Ian ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: darcs switchover
John Goerzen wrote: On 2006-01-11, John Goerzen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've talked to Simon about this, and here's what we've agreed I will do: * I will re-convert all of the top-level directories in the current libraries darcs repo, except for: doc, mk, and Cabal * Each new repo will be under darcs.haskell.org/packages * I will convert HEAD only and not the ghc-6.4 branch. Simon plans to continue using CVS for ghc-6.4 anyway. These steps are now done. See all the new repos under http://darcs.haskell.org/packages. libraries and libraries.ghc-6.4 are now gone. And GHC is now usable from the new darcs setup. I've updated the instructions on the wiki: http://cvs.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/GhcDarcs All of the packages are sync'd from CVS except for Cabal - it seemed more sensible to use the existing Cabal repo directly. However I've taken a branch of that Cabal repo to add the fptools Makefiles for now; the branch is in http://darcs.haskell.org/packages/Cabal. I added a script darcs-all at the top-level of the ghc tree which automates invoking darcs on the various sub-repos. To get a whole tree, do this: $ darcs get --partial http://darcs.haskell.org/ghc $ cd ghc $ chmod +x ./darcs-all $ ./darcs-all get and to pull new changes: $ ./darcs-all pull Please test, as we'd like to switch over as soon as possible. Cheers, Simon ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: darcs switchover
On 2006-01-10, Simon Marlow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Having both repos is starting to hurt now, it's a fiddle to move patches from darcs to CVS to commit them. So I want to throw the switch ASAP; I'm pretty certain we've dealt with any blocking problems now. So once we've got the libraries re-tailored, and tested the nightly builds with the new setup, I think we could switch. I've talked to Simon about this, and here's what we've agreed I will do: * I will re-convert all of the top-level directories in the current libraries darcs repo, except for: doc, mk, and Cabal * Each new repo will be under darcs.haskell.org/packages * I will convert HEAD only and not the ghc-6.4 branch. Simon plans to continue using CVS for ghc-6.4 anyway. * Simon will integrate the few remaining top-level files into the GHC repo. * Someone (maybe me) will write some scripts to automate checking out and updating all these repos at once. I hope to get this all done within the next few days, maybe even today. -- John ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: darcs switchover
Sven Panne [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I've been looking at the cvs configuration file CVSROOT/modules. I /think/ the procedure is something like changing this: nhc98src-d nhc98 nhc98 nhc98libraries -d nhc98/src/libraries fptools/libraries nhc98 -a nhc98src nhc98libraries to this: nhc98src-d nhc98 nhc98 nhc98libraries -o darcs get --reponame=nhc98/src/libraries \ http://cvs.haskell.org/darcs/libraries nhc98 -a nhc98src nhc98libraries and then a fresh cvs checkout of the nhc98 would be required in order to pick up the new location. As already mentioned on the cvs-all list this morning, this does not work... :-( No? I've tested it (using nhc98cpphs rather than nhc98libraries), and it seems to work for me. What is the problem? (Of course, I'm not trying to do a two-way synchronisation, just grafting a darcs repo into the cvs tree.) Regards, Malcolm ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: darcs switchover
Am Freitag, 16. Dezember 2005 12:20 schrieb Malcolm Wallace: I've been looking at the cvs configuration file CVSROOT/modules. I /think/ the procedure is something like changing this: nhc98src-d nhc98 nhc98 nhc98libraries -d nhc98/src/libraries fptools/libraries nhc98 -a nhc98src nhc98libraries to this: nhc98src-d nhc98 nhc98 nhc98libraries -o darcs get --reponame=nhc98/src/libraries \ http://cvs.haskell.org/darcs/libraries nhc98 -a nhc98src nhc98libraries and then a fresh cvs checkout of the nhc98 would be required in order to pick up the new location. Has anyone else tried this kind of tweak before and confirm that it is likely to work? If not, I might test it out with the smaller cpphs module initially. As already mentioned on the cvs-all list this morning, this does not work... :-( Cheers, S. ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: darcs switchover
On 2005-12-23, Malcolm Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is there more to this job than just running either cvs2darcs or tailor, then waiting a few days (:-) for it to finish? There is quite some time involved in bootstrapping things, especially when branches are concerned. About 30-60 minutes without branches, or 2 hours with branches, per new (darcs) repo. As a fan of laziness, I prefer not to do this any more than absolutely necessary. ;-) There is also an incremental cost; for instance, when (if?) the libraries branch for GHC 6.6, there will have to be new branches of each individual component now. (Though once it is in darcs, this is a 15-second thing) -- John ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
RE: darcs switchover
On 20 December 2005 16:19, Ross Paterson wrote: On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 03:50:02PM +, John Goerzen wrote: On 2005-12-19, Malcolm Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ross Paterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: But how about having a separate repository for each library package? Seconded. Simon, any thoughts? Also, if the library packages are separate, the rest of the stuff in the libraries directory would be part of GHC's build system (nhc98 too at the moment, but it sounds like Malcolm will be changing that) so might as well be part of the ghc repository. The time to mention this would have been a few weeks ago when I proposed the current scheme :-) I think it /would/ actually be nicer to split up the repository into separate packages. However, of the two ways to do this that John mentioned, only the second is practical IMO - that is, generate the repositories from CVS. So it's entirely up to John whether he wants to put the effort in or not. I don't think the current situation is bad - we had planned to split the packages into separate repositories eventually anyway, but we would lose the history at that point. Splitting them now means we keep the history, which is good. Cheers, Simon ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: darcs switchover
Simon Marlow [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: But how about having a separate repository for each library package? The time to mention this would have been a few weeks ago when I proposed the current scheme :-) Err, I think I did... I think it /would/ actually be nicer to split up the repository into separate packages. However, of the two ways to do this that John mentioned, only the second is practical IMO - that is, generate the repositories from CVS. So it's entirely up to John whether he wants to put the effort in or not. Is there more to this job than just running either cvs2darcs or tailor, then waiting a few days (:-) for it to finish? Regards, Malcolm ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: darcs switchover
On 2005-12-20, Malcolm Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: One thing it occurs to me to ask is what will be happening to CVS commit messages, once the switchover to darcs happens? I have already investigated it, and the short answer is that darcs 1.0.4 now has a way to make darcs apply automatically send these messages. When you darcs push to a remote repository, darcs apply is effectively run on that repo. I've tested this and it works. -- John ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: darcs switchover
On 2005-12-21, Malcolm Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ah, yes I have just upgraded to darcs 1.05 (from 1.03), and there are posthooks available for every command now. However, there is FWIW, it is not the posthook but the cc pref for apply that I'm looking at. You can set it so that apply itself generates a message when something is applied. -- John ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: darcs switchover
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donald Bruce Stewart) writes: One thing it occurs to me to ask is what will be happening to CVS commit messages, once the switchover to darcs happens? I originally wrote this script as a temporary fix until darcs supported post-apply hooks. If it does now, perhaps there's no need for the wrapper, and instead a mail program can be invoked by darcs itself as a hook (i.e. just the core of darcs-mail can be `hooked'). Ah, yes I have just upgraded to darcs 1.05 (from 1.03), and there are posthooks available for every command now. However, there is one wrinkle that means we can't use a stripped-down version of your darcs-mail script directly. The command invoked by the posthook does not, AFAICS, get to look at the patch bundle. This means the posthook can only report a single patch per bundle, something like this: darcs changes -s --last=1 | mail -s darcs commit `cat mailinglist` where previously, the --last argument could in fact determine a fully accurate count of patches contained in the bundle. I'm not sure from the documentation whether multiple patches are normally submitted simultaneously from one repository to another, but I suspect the answer is yes. Any ideas? Regards, Malcolm ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: darcs switchover
On 2005-12-19, Malcolm Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ross Paterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: No problem for me if you switch over at any time. But how about having a separate repository for each library package? Seconded. Simon, any thoughts? We could go about this one of two ways: 1) Just make branches of the current libraries repo, and in each one, remove the files that aren't relevant for a particular package 2) Re-convert the CVS files from scratch I would prefer #1 by far ;-) -- John ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: darcs switchover
On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 03:50:02PM +, John Goerzen wrote: On 2005-12-19, Malcolm Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ross Paterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: But how about having a separate repository for each library package? Seconded. Simon, any thoughts? Also, if the library packages are separate, the rest of the stuff in the libraries directory would be part of GHC's build system (nhc98 too at the moment, but it sounds like Malcolm will be changing that) so might as well be part of the ghc repository. ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: darcs switchover
Simon Marlow [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The aim is to eventually switch over to using darcs for our revision control. The point of this message is to find out what constraints people have that will affect when we can throw the switch. One thing it occurs to me to ask is what will be happening to CVS commit messages, once the switchover to darcs happens? I have investigated this briefly, and it seems that darcs does not yet directly support mailing out commit messages from a repository. There is a wrapper script at darcs get http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~dons/code/darcs-mail but this requires administration privileges on the hosting machine, since you need to rename the darcs binary proper, then install the wrapper in its place. Also, it is unclear to me whether this wrapper works equally well in all situations, e.g. with 'darcs apply' on the hosting machine, 'darcs push' from a separate repository on the same host, or 'darcs push' from a remote machine with ssh. Anyone sufficiently familiar with this to shed any light? Regards, Malcolm ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
darcs commit emails was Re: darcs switchover
Malcolm Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: One thing it occurs to me to ask is what will be happening to CVS commit messages, once the switchover to darcs happens? rss2email is one solution. It's a python script that runs from cron, so you won't have to worry about fiddling with darcs posthooks or anything. -- Shae Matijs Erisson - http://www.ScannedInAvian.com/ - Sockmonster once said: You could switch out the unicycles for badgers, and the game would be the same. ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: darcs switchover
can't we just make 'darcs send' send the patches to a public list so people can see them that way as they are sent in. John -- John Meacham - ⑆repetae.net⑆john⑈ ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: darcs switchover
Malcolm.Wallace: Simon Marlow [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The aim is to eventually switch over to using darcs for our revision control. The point of this message is to find out what constraints people have that will affect when we can throw the switch. One thing it occurs to me to ask is what will be happening to CVS commit messages, once the switchover to darcs happens? I have investigated this briefly, and it seems that darcs does not yet directly support mailing out commit messages from a repository. There is a wrapper script at darcs get http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~dons/code/darcs-mail but this requires administration privileges on the hosting machine, since you need to rename the darcs binary proper, then install the wrapper in its place. Also, it is unclear to me whether this wrapper works equally well in all situations, e.g. with 'darcs apply' on the hosting machine, 'darcs push' from a separate repository on the same host, or 'darcs push' from a remote machine with ssh. Anyone sufficiently familiar with this to shed any light? darcs-mail mails changes summaries when `apply --all' is on the cmd line -- which is the case when pushing over ssh. So it works quite nicely for the situation where you push over ssh to a central repository. A nice summary is then sent out to each address in _darcs/prefs/mailinglist. We've used this internally at UNSW for about 6 months now, and has worked quite well. I originally wrote this script as a temporary fix until darcs supported post-apply hooks. If it does now, perhaps there's no need for the wrapper, and instead a mail program can be invoked by darcs itself as a hook (i.e. just the core of darcs-mail can be `hooked'). So, in summary, if darcs post-apply hooks now work, we could strip down darcs-mail for our purposes, otherwise we could use darcs-mail, (though it only works over darcs push ssh atm). -- Don ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: darcs switchover
john: can't we just make 'darcs send' send the patches to a public list so people can see them that way as they are sent in. I think the problem would be that we still want multiple developers to darcs push over ssh, don't we? Rather than darcs sending patches to a list, for a mainatiner to pick up. -- Don ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: darcs switchover
On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 10:56:14AM +1100, Donald Bruce Stewart wrote:
john:
can't we just make 'darcs send' send the patches to a public list so
people can see them that way as they are sent in.
I think the problem would be that we still want multiple developers to
darcs push over ssh, don't we? Rather than darcs sending patches to a
list, for a mainatiner to pick up.
the way darcs itself works is that everyone uses darcs send, even david
and his script picks up patches signed by him and automatically applies
them. In any case, having darcs send go to a public list is really nice.
another possibility if you don't want to mess with gpg is that everyone
darcs send's and then the patches are 'pushed' by a main developer off
the list (which sometimes might be their own patches). I have attached a
handy little script I have bound to 'A'pply in mutt which facilitates this.
John
--
John Meacham - ⑆repetae.net⑆john⑈
#!/usr/bin/perl -w
use strict;
my $m;
my $r;
while () {
/^DarcsURL\:\s+http\:\/\/.*\/repos\/(\w+)/ and $r = $1;
$m .= $_;
}
die Could not find repo name. unless $r;
print Darcs Repo: $r\n;
umask 0022;
open FOO, | darcs apply --verbose --no-test --repodir ~/repos/$r or die
Could not pipe to darcs;
print FOO $m\n;
close FOO;
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: darcs switchover
On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 11:10:47AM -, Simon Marlow wrote: As you probably know, there is a mirror of the GHC source tree in a darcs repository. (information about accessing the darcs repository is here: http://cvs.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/GhcDarcs). The aim is to eventually switch over to using darcs for our revision control. The point of this message is to find out what constraints people have that will affect when we can throw the switch. It doesn't look like we'll be able to keep a CVS mirror going once we switch to darcs, so darcs will be the only way to get an up-to-date GHC source tree. [...] Malcolm, Ross - since you both also use the CVS libraries tree, is it going to be possible for you to switch to using darcs to get the libraries? Any idea how long you'll need? No problem for me if you switch over at any time. But how about having a separate repository for each library package? ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: darcs switchover
Ross Paterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: No problem for me if you switch over at any time. But how about having a separate repository for each library package? Seconded. Regards, Malcolm ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: darcs switchover
On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 11:10:47AM -, Simon Marlow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote a message of 44 lines which said: - You won't be able to browse the CVS repository via cvsweb any more. You can browse the contents of the darcs repository directly, and we hope to set up some kind of darcs-aware browsing too. darcsweb (http://users.auriga.wearlab.de/~alb/darcsweb/, online demos available at this address) is very nice and a serious contender for ViewVC. (It is written in Python, not in Haskell but, apart from that, it is nice.) ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
darcs switchover
Hi Folks, As you probably know, there is a mirror of the GHC source tree in a darcs repository. (information about accessing the darcs repository is here: http://cvs.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/GhcDarcs). The aim is to eventually switch over to using darcs for our revision control. The point of this message is to find out what constraints people have that will affect when we can throw the switch. It doesn't look like we'll be able to keep a CVS mirror going once we switch to darcs, so darcs will be the only way to get an up-to-date GHC source tree. How will it affect you? - If you just get the GHC sources from anonymous cvs, then you have to switch to getting sources using darcs. It's pretty simple. - If you are a developer, then you need to: (a) get sources from darcs, and (b) use 'darcs push' instead of 'cvs commit'. - You won't be able to browse the CVS repository via cvsweb any more. You can browse the contents of the darcs repository directly, and we hope to set up some kind of darcs-aware browsing too. We've switched some of our nightly builds over to using darcs, and it seems to be working nicely. darcs get --partial can actually get the sources quicker than anonymous CVS used to. Please let me know if the switchover is going to adversely affect your life, so that we can formulate a plan and timescale for switching over. Malcolm, Ross - since you both also use the CVS libraries tree, is it going to be possible for you to switch to using darcs to get the libraries? Any idea how long you'll need? Cheers, Simon ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: darcs switchover
Simon Marlow [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Malcolm, Ross - since you both also use the CVS libraries tree, is it going to be possible for you to switch to using darcs to get the libraries? Any idea how long you'll need? I've been looking at the cvs configuration file CVSROOT/modules. I /think/ the procedure is something like changing this: nhc98src-d nhc98 nhc98 nhc98libraries -d nhc98/src/libraries fptools/libraries nhc98 -a nhc98src nhc98libraries to this: nhc98src-d nhc98 nhc98 nhc98libraries -o darcs get --reponame=nhc98/src/libraries \ http://cvs.haskell.org/darcs/libraries nhc98 -a nhc98src nhc98libraries and then a fresh cvs checkout of the nhc98 would be required in order to pick up the new location. Has anyone else tried this kind of tweak before and confirm that it is likely to work? If not, I might test it out with the smaller cpphs module initially. Regards, Malcolm ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
