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
Simon Marlow wrote:
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?
How about a cronjob that runs
darcs send upstream-repo --to=some-list
On 27/08/2009 11:18, Sittampalam, Ganesh wrote:
Simon Marlow wrote:
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?
How about a cronjob that
Simon Marlow wrote:
On 27/08/2009 11:18, Sittampalam, Ganesh wrote:
Simon Marlow wrote:
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?
Hello,
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 18:15, Simon Marlow marlo...@gmail.com wrote:
* Boot libraries are of several kinds:
- INDEPENDENT: Independently maintained (e.g. time, haskeline)
- COUPLED: Tightly coupled to GHC, but used by others (base)
- SPECIFIC: Totally specific to GHC (e.g.
On 27/08/2009 00:55, Don Stewart wrote:
marlowsd:
Simon and I have been chatting about how we accommodate libraries in the
GHC repository. After previous discussion on this list, GHC has been
gradually migrating towards having snapshots of libraries kept as
tarballs in the repo (currently only
On 27/08/2009 11:24, Sittampalam, Ganesh wrote:
Simon Marlow wrote:
On 27/08/2009 11:18, Sittampalam, Ganesh wrote:
Simon Marlow wrote:
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.
Simon Marlow wrote:
Simon Marlow wrote:
I suggest if we stick with the independent repo approach that we
have some automation to check that changes are indeed getting
pushed upstream.
[snip unhelpful suggestion from me]
Yes, it tells you that you've screwed up, rather than telling you
Incedentally, the reason I'd like us to make a decision on this now is
because I'm about to add two new boot libraries:
- binary, to support a binary cache of GHC's package database
(INDEPENDENT)
- bin-package-db, the code to read and write the binary package
database (SPECIFIC,
