+1 Stability is very important.
Also, do we have an ETA for when we will have an improved infrastructure for automated builds and the associated tests. I think this would help a lot with stability and shorten the time to the next release. On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 6:46 PM, Simon Marlow <marlo...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 27/05/14 09:06, Austin Seipp wrote: > >> PPS: This might also impact the 7.10 schedule, but last Simon and I >> talked, we thought perhaps shooting for ICFP this time (and actually >> hitting it) was a good plan. So I'd estimate on that a 7.8.4 might >> happen a few months from now, after summer. >> > > FWIW, I think doing 7.10 in October is way too soon. Major releases > create a large distributed effort for package maintainers and users, and > there are other knock-on effects, so we shouldn't do them too often. A lot > of our users want stability, while many of them also want progress, and 12 > months between major releases is the compromise we settled on. > > The last major release slipped for various reasons, but I don't believe > that means we should try to get back on track by having a short time > between 7.8 and 7.10. 7.8 will be out of maintenance when it has only just > made it into a platform release. > > Anyway, that's my opinion. Of course if everyone says they don't mind a > 7.10 in October then I withdraw my objection :-) > > (as a data point, upgrading to 7.8 at work cost me three weeks, but we're > probably a special case) > > Cheers, > Simon > > > _______________________________________________ > ghc-devs mailing list > ghc-d...@haskell.org > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs >
_______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
