Edward, and core library colleagues,

Any views on this?  It would be good to make progress.

Thanks

Simon

From: ghc-devs [mailto:ghc-devs-bounces@haskell.org] On Behalf Of Simon Peyton Jones
Sent: 04 August 2014 16:01
To: core-libraries-committee@haskell.org
Cc: ghc-devs@haskell.org
Subject: Core libraries bug tracker

Edward, and core library colleagues,

This came up in our weekly GHC discussion

· Does the Core Libraries Committee have a Trac?  Surely, surely you should, else you’ll lose track of issues.

· Would you like to use GHC’s Trac for the purpose?   Advantages:

o People often report core library issues on GHC’s Trac anyway, so telling them to move it somewhere else just creates busy-work --- and maybe they won’t bother, which leaves it in our pile.

o Several of these libraries are closely coupled to GHC, and you might want to milestone some library tickets with an upcoming GHC release

· If so we’d need a canonical way to identify tickets as CLC issues.  Perhaps by making “core-libraries” the owner?  Or perhaps the “Component” field?

· Some core libraries (e.g. random) have a maintainer that isn’t the committee.  So that maintainer should be the owner of the ticket. Or the CLC might like a particular member to own a ticket.  Either way, that suggest using the “Component” field to identify CLC tickets

· Or maybe you want a Trac of your own?

The underlying issue from our end is that we’d like a way to

· filter out tickets that you are dealing with

· and be sure you are dealing with them

· without losing track of milestones… i.e. when building a release we want to be sure that important tickets are indeed fixed before releasing

Simon