one thing I wonder about is how should we approach noting
 "theres a new language constructor, we should figure out a good way to present it in haddock" in this work flow? 
because the initial haddocks presentation might just be a strawman till someone thinks about it carefully right?


On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 6:30 PM, Herbert Valerio Riedel <hvriedel@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2014-08-14 at 00:09:40 +0200, Mateusz Kowalczyk wrote:

[...]

> I don't know what the GHC branch name will be yet. ‘ghc-head’ makes most
> sense but IIRC Herbert had some objections as it had been used in the
> past for something else, but maybe he can pitch in.

I had no objections at all to that name, 'ghc-head' is fine with me :-)
_______________________________________________
ghc-devs mailing list
ghc-devs@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs