Hi Austin, I apologize for not having read the full email yet (I'm in a hurry right now), but...
* Austin Seipp <[email protected]> [2013-06-09 00:23:22-0500] > --> Let's just put base and testsuite inside the GHC repository > directly. No submodules, no floating repos. Just put it directly > inside and make a super commit, I guess. GHC becomes the de facto > repository. And hey, why not nofib? > > I know, I know. People really want to split the maintenance burdens I > guess, and ideologically the Haskell community is all about clean > separation but, please? All of GHC HQ are the de facto maintainers of > this stuff anyway. And as Jan mentioned, testsuite is really *so* > crucial GHC should have it inline. The testsuite is perhaps the most > important of all. > > There are other candidates for this treatment too, really. For > example, why is template-haskell, ghc-prim, and hpc split out? GHC is > the only thing that supports them. template-haskell is especially > super-intrusive of an extension to support, and arguably hpc as well. > integer-simple and integer-gmp follow the exact same story. Same with > hoopl and dph. They're all ours. We own them. Just put them all inside > GHC and be done with it. Having active fragmentation in the VCS is not > necessary when there need be none. These packages de-facto ship with > GHC and are very tied to it. I'm a strong -1 on this. As one example, we have forks of base and ghc-prim for Haskell suite: https://github.com/haskell-suite/base https://github.com/haskell-suite/ghc-prim which would be much more complicated if these were not independent repositories. But more generally, I think there's still hope that the core packages will be made portable — I'm referring to Joachim Breitner's work on splitting the base. Roman _______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
