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 or raising
the bar for contributions to Cabal either (we have lots of people who
make small one-off contributions).
I wonder how many of the libraries are "core" in that they
need to be changed a lot for GHC?
- all the ones that depend on GHC internals, such as base.
(Except the current system has many of them use preprocessor
conditionals so that can they depend on various compilers'
internals, including nhc98 and hugs? Because a lot of that
code is actually shared between implementations)
- Cabal, since it's needing a lot of extension to make GHC
work with it.
Do boot-libraries like unix typically need work by GHC devs?
On the other hand, it's looking like there's enough
intersection between GHC and other-haskell that it's not
such a helpful path to pursue.
not quite related: I wonder about various haskell libs
switching to darcs2 format. A few new programs use it
already. As distros include darcs2, it should become less
painful. The conversion is less painful for code that's
branched less. So maybe in the future a lot of Haskell libs
will be in the superior darcs2 format.
what an unpleasant situation! But cross-converting between
darcs and git format for the same repo is probably even worse.
Last time I tried the darcs-all script (maybe a month ago,
using darcs 2.0.2), IIRC, it hung, or had some other problem
in one of the libraries. Even though it was a clean copy
that I'd only ever pulled into (many times, and was getted
by darcs-1.0.9, but still). And darcs-all on the libraries
has always been a slow sequential task. So I'm not actually
all that enamoured of darcs for ghc development, even for
the libs. Since I couldn't update anymore (despite going
into ghc-head/libraries/something and mucking around with
darcs-revert and such), I just deleted the tree and decided
to wait until GHC switches VCS before getting a new copy.
(trying git-cloning ghc.git sometime, took about 10 minutes,
nearly no CPU time, and 80 MB, so I'm pretty happy about
that random experience, but I didn't try to do anything with
the repo)
-Isaac
_______________________________________________
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
