one thing I wonder about is how should we approach noting "theres a new language constructor, we should figure out a good way to present it in haddock" in this work flow? because the initial haddocks presentation might just be a strawman till someone thinks about it carefully right?
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 6:30 PM, Herbert Valerio Riedel <[email protected]> wrote: > On 2014-08-14 at 00:09:40 +0200, Mateusz Kowalczyk wrote: > > [...] > > > I don't know what the GHC branch name will be yet. ‘ghc-head’ makes most > > sense but IIRC Herbert had some objections as it had been used in the > > past for something else, but maybe he can pitch in. > > I had no objections at all to that name, 'ghc-head' is fine with me :-) > _______________________________________________ > ghc-devs mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs >
_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
