On Sat, 2008-08-09 at 15:46 +1000, Manuel M T Chakravarty wrote:
Raising the bar for developers to contribute to a project has been
proven to be a very bad idea many times. Let's not take GHC down that
path.
I don't especially relish having to learn another vcs tool or raising
the bar
Duncan Coutts wrote:
On Sat, 2008-08-09 at 15:46 +1000, Manuel M T Chakravarty wrote:
Raising the bar for developers to contribute to a project has been
proven to be a very bad idea many times. Let's not take GHC down that
path.
I don't especially relish having to learn another vcs tool
On Sat, Aug 09, 2008 at 03:46:50PM +1000, Manuel M T Chakravarty wrote:
Don was excited about getting more people to look at the source
when it is in git (see the comments he posted from reddit).
I am skeptical that this initial excitement and cloning will translate
into more developers.
dons:
chak:
Ian Lynagh:
On Fri, Aug 08, 2008 at 12:04:15PM +1000, Manuel M T Chakravarty
wrote:
I seriously hope the plan is to move all *core* libraries (including
GHC's cabal repo) etc over to git, too. In other word, everything
that you need to build the development version
As a very part-time, temporarily inactive GHC developer I will offer
some opinions which should carry no weight:
* When I saw the announcement, I cheered! Last fall, I lost 2 weeks
of a 9-week visit to darcs hell. While the alleged features may
be alluring, the software simply doesn't
Duncan Coutts:
On Sat, 2008-08-09 at 15:46 +1000, Manuel M T Chakravarty wrote:
Raising the bar for developers to contribute to a project has been
proven to be a very bad idea many times. Let's not take GHC down
that
path.
I don't especially relish having to learn another vcs tool or
Ian Lynagh:
On Sat, Aug 09, 2008 at 03:46:50PM +1000, Manuel M T Chakravarty
wrote:
I am not talking about all libs, I am talking about the core libs.
Most developers of the core libs are also GHC developers.
I'm not sure that's true. e.g. Malcolm and Ross both commit to the
bootlibs, and we
On 10/08/2008, at 14:40, Manuel M T Chakravarty wrote:
Personally, I am more than happy to stay with darcs, too, but my
understanding was that at least the Simons decided that we are going
to move from darcs to git. All I am saying is that whatever vcs ghc
uses, you need to be able to
On 10/08/2008, at 05:38, Don Stewart wrote:
Instead, if we just use ubiquitous, common tools -- like git -- for
everything, we minimise the pain for people, and sit firmly in the
mainstream of open source.
While I agree with this in general, I'm not sure it really applies to
vcs (especially
