Hi Simon, The download page already has a big "Stop" there. http://www.haskell.org/ghc/download_ghc_7_6_2
Apart from that, I am /really/ looking forward to sse/avx extensions and the official new-code-gen to further narrow the gap between high-performance C and high-performance Haskell. That being said, I would be fine using HEAD, but a release is very convenient in terms of installing, even if they are in the form of "rc" (which I typically install to see if something breaks or is faster). Maybe you want to consider providing a couple of release candidates instead of 7.8 now? Gruss, Christian * Simon Peyton Jones <simo...@microsoft.com> [07.02.2013 19:25]: > It's fairly simple in my mind. There are two "channels" (if I understand > Mark's terminology right): > > > > . Haskell Platform: > > o A stable development environment, lots of libraries known to work > > o Newcomers, and people who value stability, should use the Haskell > Platform > > o HP comes with a particular version of GHC, probably not the hottest > new one, but that doesn't matter. It works. > > > > . GHC home page downloads: > > o More features but not so stable > > o Libraries not guaranteed to work > > o Worth releasing, though, as a forcing function to fix bugs, and as a > checkpoint for people to test, so that by the time the HP adopts a > particular version it is reasonably solid. > > > > So we already have the two channels Mark asks for, don't we? One is > called the Haskell Platform and one is called the GHC home page. > > That leaves a PR issue: we really don't want newcomers or Joe Users > wanting the "new shiny". They want the Haskell Platform, and as Mark says > those users should not pay the slightest attention until it appears in the > Haskell Platform. > > > > So perhaps we principally need a way to point people away from GHC and > towards HP? eg We could prominently say at every download point "Stop! > Are you sure you want this? You might be better off with the Haskell > Platform! Here's why...". > > > > Have I understood aright? If so, how could we achieve the right social > dynamics? > > > > Our goal is to let people who value stability get stability, while the > hot-shots race along in a different channel and pay the price of flat > tires etc. > > > > PS: absolutely right to use 7.6.2 for the next HP. Don't even think about > 7.8. > > > > Simon > > > > > > > > From: Mark Lentczner [mailto:mark.lentcz...@gmail.com] > Sent: 07 February 2013 17:43 > To: Simon Peyton-Jones > Cc: andreas.voel...@gmail.com; Carter Schonwald; GHC users; Simon Marlow; > parallel-haskell; kosti...@gmail.com; Edsko de Vries; ghc-d...@haskell.org > Subject: Re: GHC 7.8 release? > > > > I'd say the window for 7.8 in the platform is about closed. If 7.8 were to > be release in the next two weeks that would be just about the least amount > of time I'd want to see for libraries in the platform to get all stable > with the GHC version. And we'd also be counting on the GHC team to be > quickly responding to bugs so that there could be a point release of 7.8 > mid-April. Historically, none of that seems likely. > > > > So my current trajectory is to base HP 2013.2.0.0 on GHC 7.6.2. > > > > Since 7.8 will seems like it will be released before May, we will be faced > again with the bad public relations issue: Everyone will want the new > shiny and be confused as to why the platform is such a laggard. We'll see > four reactions: > > o New comers who are starting out and figure they should use the > latest... Many will try to use 7.8, half the libraries on hackage > won't work, things will be wonky, and they'll have a poor experience. > o People doing production / project work will stay on 7.6 and ignore 7.8 > for a few months. > o The small group of people exploring the frontiers will know how to get > things set up and be happy. > o Eventually library authors will get around to making sure their stuff > will work with it. > > I wish GHC would radically change it's release process. Things like 7.8 > shouldn't be release as "7.8". That sounds major and stable. The web site > will have 7.8 at the top. The warning to use the platform will fall flat > because it makes the platform look out of date. Really, "7.8" should be in > a different release channel, not on the front page. It should bake in that > channel for six months - where only the third group of people will use it, > until it is getting close to merge into main, at which point the fourth > group will start to use it, so that the day it hits main, all the > libraries just work. Ideally, the first two groups of people will not pay > the slightest attention to it until it is further baked. > > > > While we achievements of the GHC team are great, less than half of those > 7.8 features seem interesting from the viewpoint of the aims of > the platform. I don't think adding syntactic or type-level features are > really all that important for Haskell at this juncture. And while I do > like to see improvements in generated code and run-time performance, I > think even those are less important than making crucial ecosystem > improvements to things like package management, cross-compilation, and > libraries. > > > > - Mark > _______________________________________________ > Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list > Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
pgplNgGKTFQbE.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users