Hi Mateusz,
I remember your email and I believe I responded with the OK at the
time - my impression was that it was ready to be merged and would
shortly be done after that, but I didn't hear anything back about it.
I apologize for my dropping the ball.
As for your actual error - ghc-paths is only used in Haddock when it's
not built in the GHC tree (as per the cabal file,) so I find it very
suspicious that your package check is mentioning it at all (it's not
mentioned anywhere else in any GHC sources.) Can you verify that it's
there with `./inplace/bin/ghc-pkg list`? I'm not even sure how it
could possibly get involved.
Finally, can you be more specific about exactly how you tested these
changes with your modified Haddock? I presume it was something like:
$ ... clone ghc source ...
$ cd ghc
$ ... get extra stuff with ./sync-all ...
$ cd utils/haddock
$ ... use git to grab your code from github ...
$ cd ../..
$ sh ./validate
But I'd like to make sure I know exactly what's going on. I can try
testing your branch later today.
On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 4:29 AM, Mateusz Kowalczyk
On 07/01/14 10:20, Simon Peyton Jones wrote:
| David stepped down and Simon Marlow has a long time ago too! It is now | Simon Hengel who maintains it.
OK, well perhaps you can immediately push a change to haddock.cabal to reflect this? That's how we know.
I will try later but I think I don't have permissions. I can at best push to Simon's branch where he would periodically push to the GHC hosted repository (or perhaps it would get pulled from, I do not know).
| Is it by now too late for 7.8? I'm afraid Simon H is away without much | access to technology until the 20th.
Realistically that would push 7.8 RC to the end of Jan. Why would that be better than pushing to head just after the 7.8 release? Will 7.8 users see a big improvement if it was in? What do others think?
The changes were mostly there for user benefit. The markup can now be escaped much better. If we can validate what's on Simon's new-parser branch reasonably quickly, we might even be able to push in the new features: new mark up, nested paragraphs, better lists, headers… I'm trying to push for 7.8 because Haddock ships with GHC and 7.8 is the stable release that everyone will be using in couple of months time. If the changes don't get into 7.8, we'll have to wait for the next stable release for the users to benefit. Is this incorrect? I was always under the impression that the only Haddock releases we can reasonably make are with stable GHC releases. Of course, anyone can compile HEAD and generate the docs for their own viewing but for example, Hackage will run stable compiler and all the docs will still be using old Haddock.
I'd love to hear that I'm wrong about this and that Haddock releases separate from GHC are possible but I don't think that's the case.
S
-- Mateusz K. _______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
-- Regards, Austin Seipp, Haskell Consultant Well-Typed LLP, http://www.well-typed.com/