My 2c, I would love to see the remote GHCi patch land for 8.0. It is a big change though.
Alan On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 4:31 PM, Austin Seipp <aus...@well-typed.com> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 7:50 AM, Ben Gamari <b...@well-typed.com> wrote: >> Luite Stegeman <stege...@gmail.com> writes: >> >>> Is Simon's remote GHCi patch planned to go in before the fork? I'm still >>> working on upgrading GHCJS to work with the master branch, but I haven't >>> quite finished yet. This change would clearly require some restructuring of >>> GHCJSi and Template Haskell in GHCJS, and I'm not sure if a week is enough >>> to test the changes. Also the recent removal of boot file merging >>> reintroduces a problem with that I'm not sure can be fixed without adding a >>> new hook. >>> >> Simon, what do you think about this? >> >> I'm a bit worried that this patch is quite late and breaks users like >> Luite. Nevertheless, I am willing to hear arguments for merging. > > I think this is one we're best off leaving in HEAD. It's a very large > change, and I'm a bit scared of bringing it in right at the finish > line, so to speak. I think it might be best to just get it in sometime > after the branch IMO... > >>> What's the policy on adding hooks or GHC API tweaks after the freeze? >>> >> We'll need to work that out when we get to that point. It largely >> depends upon how confined and "safe" a change appears to be. That being >> said, given how much other churn has happened for this release, I don't >> think we want to be sloppy with merge discipline this time around. >> >> Austin, what do you think? >> >> Cheers, >> >> - Ben >> >> _______________________________________________ >> ghc-devs mailing list >> ghc-devs@haskell.org >> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs >> > > Hrm. If possible I would like to avoid any breaking changes past the > first RC, which has normally been my policy... Generally it's just > easier for everyone this way and people typically don't like too many > mid-flight changes, once things are in RC-mode. > > That said, if it's something game-breaking for, say, GHCJS, I'd be > open to it. But we should try to fix it ASAP, not in the middle of > February. So it would be best if we could find out what hooks or > tweaks we needed Very Soon. > > -- > Regards, > > Austin Seipp, Haskell Consultant > Well-Typed LLP, http://www.well-typed.com/ > _______________________________________________ > ghc-devs mailing list > ghc-devs@haskell.org > http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs _______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
