On Fri, Aug 08, 2014 at 09:00:21AM +0200, Herbert Valerio Riedel wrote:
Just to clarify, as the last sentence contains a double-negation: GHC devs continue pushing to github.com/haddock.git's `master` branch to keep Haddock building with GHC HEAD? It's just that the Haddock development proper happens in a branch other than `master` from now on?
From my perspective I would prefer to use `master` for Haddock development and use a branch with some other name for GHC development. My main motivation here is that as a contributor to Haddock "I expect the latest code to be on `master`, and I would use it as a base when developing new features".
Alternatively, maybe use `master` for both Haddock and GHC development, but push to different remotes (say use http://git.haskell.org/haddock.git for GHC development and https://github.com/haskell/haddock for Haddock development). I think this is what we already do for e.g. `containers`. Cheers, Simon