On 08/08/2014 10:18 AM, Simon Marlow wrote:
I thought this was what you were already doing :-) Anyway, this is more or less the setup we had in mind when Haddock was added to the GHC tree. The only question is which branches are used for GHC and for regular development, and where they live. As long as that's clear for everyone (both Haddock and GHC developers), then this should be fine.
I think there is no problem if they both live in the existing repository (github.com/haskell/haddock) or whatever the submodule refers to today.
The GHC release engineer will need to give the Haddock maintainers plenty of heads-up time before a release so that the merge can be done - Austin could you add that to the release checklist?
Right, although I don't exactly plan to abandon any of the GHC information channels I'm on today: I tend to be well aware of a release coming.
Cheers, Simon
-- Mateusz K.