GHC 7.8.3 release

Austin Seipp

27 May 2014 27 May '14

4:06 a.m.

Hello all, After a long week, I've finally gotten a little time to reply to emails, and I mainly have one question I'd like to ask. First, please direct your attention to this: https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/query?status=closed&status=merge&status=patch&milestone=7.8.3&group=resolution&col=id&col=summary&col=owner&col=type&col=priority&col=component&col=version&order=priority This is the 7.8.3 milestone, but it only considers things that are: - 1) Fixed - 2) Going to be merged - 3) Are a patch to be still merged. That is, it is a solid representation of the difference between 7.8.2 and the 7.8 branch tip. The question is: when should we do the release? There are several bugs there that seem quite problematic for users - #9045, #7097, #9001, #8768 and #9078 in particular. If these bugs are really problematic (and I sort of feel they are) then the release can happen soon. I can do it within a week from now, and we could punt more to a 7.8.4 release. I ask this because my time to dedicate to GHC is a bit thin right now, so you must help me decide what's important! So please let me know - just a general vote in favor of doing it within some X timeframe (even 'real soon' or 'a week would be great') would be nice. PS: I apologize for the lack of status updates and brief email - my time for GHC has been in very short order the past two weeks in particular, and I've finally just returned to a computer (not mine) for right now to ask this. PPS: This might also impact the 7.10 schedule, but last Simon and I talked, we thought perhaps shooting for ICFP this time (and actually hitting it) was a good plan. So I'd estimate on that a 7.8.4 might happen a few months from now, after summer. -- Regards, Austin Seipp, Haskell Consultant Well-Typed LLP, http://www.well-typed.com/

Show replies by date

Herbert Valerio Riedel

27 May 27 May

4:19 a.m.

Hi, On 2014-05-27 at 10:06:39 +0200, Austin Seipp wrote: [...]

...

The question is: when should we do the release? There are several bugs there that seem quite problematic for users - #9045, #7097, #9001, #8768 and #9078 in particular.

Personally, I'd vote for a soon-ish 7.8.3 release for things which already have a working good/low-risk fix in ghc-7.8, so the next HP can go with 7.8.3 instead of using the known-to-be-suboptimal 7.8.2 Just my 2 cents

Yitzchak Gale

6:13 a.m.

Herbert Valerio Riedel wrote:

...

Personally, I'd vote for a soon-ish 7.8.3 release for things which already have a working good/low-risk fix in ghc-7.8, so the next HP can go with 7.8.3 instead of using the known-to-be-suboptimal 7.8.2

It's not certain that the HP team will be able to wait for that, even if 7.8.3 is released within a week. It would require yet another round of version tweaks, re-testing, etc. Given how dreadfully delayed the HP release is already, that would be a difficult decision to make. Regards, Yitz

Herbert Valerio Riedel

6:27 a.m.

On 2014-05-27 at 12:13:18 +0200, Yitzchak Gale wrote:

...

Herbert Valerio Riedel wrote:

...
Personally, I'd vote for a soon-ish 7.8.3 release for things which already have a working good/low-risk fix in ghc-7.8, so the next HP can go with 7.8.3 instead of using the known-to-be-suboptimal 7.8.2

It's not certain that the HP team will be able to wait for that, even if 7.8.3 is released within a week. It would require yet another round of version tweaks, re-testing, etc. Given how dreadfully delayed the HP release is already, that would be a difficult decision to make.

What kind of version tweaks are you thinking about? (Afaics, the GHC bundled libraries don't have any version bumps.)

Yitzchak Gale

6:47 a.m.

Herbert Valerio Riedel wrote:

...

What kind of version tweaks are you thinking about? (Afaics, the GHC bundled libraries don't have any version bumps.)

Well for one thing, wouldn't the version of base be bumped? If the bugs fixed in 7.8.3 affect any packages in the platform, we would want to make whatever changes are needed to make sure that the fixes work for them - at least bumping base. Then everything would need to be re-built and re-tested. And if no packages in the platform are affected, then given the ridiculous delay of the platform release already, it's harder justify waiting any longer. Like I said - it would be a difficult decision (and not mine to make). -Yitz

Manuel M T Chakravarty

7:09 a.m.

As far as I can see, the proposed fixes are all compiler and RTS fixes. (At least, it should be easy to restrict 6.8.3 to that. Austin?) So, I don’t think it would affect the packages. And of what use is a platform that includes a compiler of which we know that it has serious problems? Manuel Yitzchak Gale :

...

Herbert Valerio Riedel wrote:

...
What kind of version tweaks are you thinking about? (Afaics, the GHC bundled libraries don't have any version bumps.)

Well for one thing, wouldn't the version of base be bumped?

If the bugs fixed in 7.8.3 affect any packages in the platform, we would want to make whatever changes are needed to make sure that the fixes work for them - at least bumping base. Then everything would need to be re-built and re-tested. And if no packages in the platform are affected, then given the ridiculous delay of the platform release already, it's harder justify waiting any longer. Like I said - it would be a difficult decision (and not mine to make).

-Yitz _______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs

Herbert Valerio Riedel

7:29 a.m.

On 2014-05-27 at 12:47:53 +0200, Yitzchak Gale wrote:

...

Herbert Valerio Riedel wrote:

...
What kind of version tweaks are you thinking about? (Afaics, the GHC bundled libraries don't have any version bumps.)

Well for one thing, wouldn't the version of base be bumped?

There's not been any change yet to base in the ghc-7.8 branch since the 7.8.2 release: http://git.haskell.org/packages/base.git/shortlog/refs/heads/ghc-7.8 as you can see from https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/Commentary/Libraries/VersionHistory it's happened in the past already, that 'base' was not bumped for every (minor) GHC release. It's rather the exception when `base` version bumps are performed for minor GHC releases.

...

If the bugs fixed in 7.8.3 affect any packages in the platform, we would want to make whatever changes are needed to make sure that the fixes work for them - at least bumping base.

While I appreciate there may be packages affected by GHC 7.8.2/7.8.3 changes, I still fail to see how artificially bumping base would help here.

...

Then everything would need to be re-built and re-tested. And if no packages in the platform are affected, then given the ridiculous delay of the platform release already, it's harder justify waiting any longer. Like I said - it would be a difficult decision (and not mine to make).

Yitzchak Gale

8:15 a.m.

OK then. It's just a question of updating some scripts, rebuilding and retesting. If these are serious generable usability issues, you are right that it sounds compelling. Still, it will add time, so Mark will have to decide. Thanks, Yitz On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 2:29 PM, Herbert Valerio Riedel wrote:

...

On 2014-05-27 at 12:47:53 +0200, Yitzchak Gale wrote:

...
Herbert Valerio Riedel wrote:

...
What kind of version tweaks are you thinking about? (Afaics, the GHC bundled libraries don't have any version bumps.)

Well for one thing, wouldn't the version of base be bumped?

There's not been any change yet to base in the ghc-7.8 branch since the 7.8.2 release:

http://git.haskell.org/packages/base.git/shortlog/refs/heads/ghc-7.8

as you can see from

https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/Commentary/Libraries/VersionHistory

it's happened in the past already, that 'base' was not bumped for every (minor) GHC release. It's rather the exception when `base` version bumps are performed for minor GHC releases.

...
If the bugs fixed in 7.8.3 affect any packages in the platform, we would want to make whatever changes are needed to make sure that the fixes work for them - at least bumping base.

While I appreciate there may be packages affected by GHC 7.8.2/7.8.3 changes, I still fail to see how artificially bumping base would help here.

...
Then everything would need to be re-built and re-tested. And if no packages in the platform are affected, then given the ridiculous delay of the platform release already, it's harder justify waiting any longer. Like I said - it would be a difficult decision (and not mine to make).

Manuel M T Chakravarty

10:17 p.m.

Mark, Did you see this thread? Manuel Yitzchak Gale :

...

OK then. It's just a question of updating some scripts, rebuilding and retesting. If these are serious generable usability issues, you are right that it sounds compelling. Still, it will add time, so Mark will have to decide.

Thanks, Yitz

On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 2:29 PM, Herbert Valerio Riedel wrote:

...
On 2014-05-27 at 12:47:53 +0200, Yitzchak Gale wrote:

...
Herbert Valerio Riedel wrote:

...
What kind of version tweaks are you thinking about? (Afaics, the GHC bundled libraries don't have any version bumps.)

Well for one thing, wouldn't the version of base be bumped?

There's not been any change yet to base in the ghc-7.8 branch since the 7.8.2 release:

http://git.haskell.org/packages/base.git/shortlog/refs/heads/ghc-7.8

as you can see from

https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/Commentary/Libraries/VersionHistory

it's happened in the past already, that 'base' was not bumped for every (minor) GHC release. It's rather the exception when `base` version bumps are performed for minor GHC releases.

...
If the bugs fixed in 7.8.3 affect any packages in the platform, we would want to make whatever changes are needed to make sure that the fixes work for them - at least bumping base.

While I appreciate there may be packages affected by GHC 7.8.2/7.8.3 changes, I still fail to see how artificially bumping base would help here.

...
Then everything would need to be re-built and re-tested. And if no packages in the platform are affected, then given the ridiculous delay of the platform release already, it's harder justify waiting any longer. Like I said - it would be a difficult decision (and not mine to make).

_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs

George Colpitts

9:01 a.m.

+1 for "a soon-ish 7.8.3 release for things which already have a working good/low-risk fix in ghc-7.8, so the next HP can go with 7.8.3 instead of using the known-to-be-suboptimal 7.8.2" Also, I don't have a reproducible case but I am getting occasional errors with 7.8.2 on Apple Mavericks that kill ghci where the error is: ld: illegal text-relocation to '_ghczmprim_GHCziTypes_ZMZN_closure' in /usr/local/lib/ghc-7.8.2/ghc-prim-0.3.1.0/libHSghc-prim-0.3.1.0-ghc7.8.2.dylib from '_cbea_info' in /Users/gcolpitts/algo1/ps3-exp.o for architecture x86_64 collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status phase `Linker' failed (exitcode = 1) I'm wondering if anybody else has seen this or has any thoughts on this. It's not a show stopper for me as it is relatively rare and I just restart ghci. I'm using ghci inside emacs (Aquamacs 2.5) Thanks George On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 5:19 AM, Herbert Valerio Riedel wrote:

...

Hi,

On 2014-05-27 at 10:06:39 +0200, Austin Seipp wrote:

[...]

...
The question is: when should we do the release? There are several bugs there that seem quite problematic for users - #9045, #7097, #9001, #8768 and #9078 in particular.

Personally, I'd vote for a soon-ish 7.8.3 release for things which already have a working good/low-risk fix in ghc-7.8, so the next HP can go with 7.8.3 instead of using the known-to-be-suboptimal 7.8.2

Just my 2 cents _______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs

Kazu Yamamoto

4:39 a.m.

Hi Austin,

...

I ask this because my time to dedicate to GHC is a bit thin right now, so you must help me decide what's important! So please let me know - just a general vote in favor of doing it within some X timeframe (even 'real soon' or 'a week would be great') would be nice.

Would you give a look at: http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-devs/2014-May/004990.html http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-devs/2014-May/004993.html yesod-bin cannot be compiled with the coming GHC 7.8.3 yet. I believe regression was introduced. --Kazu

Manuel M T Chakravarty

5:11 a.m.

I believe #9078 affects all EDSLs that use Andy Gill’s stable name method to implement observable sharing. It certainly crashes Accelerate. I would very much appreciate if 7.8.3 would be released in time to make it into the upcoming Haskell Platform. (If the platform would ship with 7.8.2., that would be a quite bad for all affected EDSL libraries.) Do we know the projected release date for the platform? Manuel PS: For Accelerate, the situation is actually rather awkward right now. Due to the changes re ambiguous signatures in GHC 7.8, Accelerate needs to introduce a breaking API change to compile with 7.8. However, we can’t really fully transition to 7.8 until #9078 is fixed. Austin Seipp :

...

Hello all,

After a long week, I've finally gotten a little time to reply to emails, and I mainly have one question I'd like to ask.

First, please direct your attention to this:

https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/query?status=closed&status=merge&status=patch&milestone=7.8.3&group=resolution&col=id&col=summary&col=owner&col=type&col=priority&col=component&col=version&order=priority

This is the 7.8.3 milestone, but it only considers things that are:

- 1) Fixed - 2) Going to be merged - 3) Are a patch to be still merged.

That is, it is a solid representation of the difference between 7.8.2 and the 7.8 branch tip.

The question is: when should we do the release? There are several bugs there that seem quite problematic for users - #9045, #7097, #9001, #8768 and #9078 in particular.

If these bugs are really problematic (and I sort of feel they are) then the release can happen soon. I can do it within a week from now, and we could punt more to a 7.8.4 release.

I ask this because my time to dedicate to GHC is a bit thin right now, so you must help me decide what's important! So please let me know - just a general vote in favor of doing it within some X timeframe (even 'real soon' or 'a week would be great') would be nice.

PS: I apologize for the lack of status updates and brief email - my time for GHC has been in very short order the past two weeks in particular, and I've finally just returned to a computer (not mine) for right now to ask this.

PPS: This might also impact the 7.10 schedule, but last Simon and I talked, we thought perhaps shooting for ICFP this time (and actually hitting it) was a good plan. So I'd estimate on that a 7.8.4 might happen a few months from now, after summer.

-- Regards,

Austin Seipp, Haskell Consultant Well-Typed LLP, http://www.well-typed.com/ _______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Niklas Larsson

12:15 p.m.

Hi! It would be great if the patch I added on #9080 was put into 7.8.3 (well, I guess someone has to commit it to master first). Niklas 2014-05-27 10:06 GMT+02:00 Austin Seipp :

...

Hello all,

After a long week, I've finally gotten a little time to reply to emails, and I mainly have one question I'd like to ask.

First, please direct your attention to this:

https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/query?status=closed&status=merge&status=patch&milestone=7.8.3&group=resolution&col=id&col=summary&col=owner&col=type&col=priority&col=component&col=version&order=priority

This is the 7.8.3 milestone, but it only considers things that are:

- 1) Fixed - 2) Going to be merged - 3) Are a patch to be still merged.

That is, it is a solid representation of the difference between 7.8.2 and the 7.8 branch tip.

The question is: when should we do the release? There are several bugs there that seem quite problematic for users - #9045, #7097, #9001, #8768 and #9078 in particular.

If these bugs are really problematic (and I sort of feel they are) then the release can happen soon. I can do it within a week from now, and we could punt more to a 7.8.4 release.

I ask this because my time to dedicate to GHC is a bit thin right now, so you must help me decide what's important! So please let me know - just a general vote in favor of doing it within some X timeframe (even 'real soon' or 'a week would be great') would be nice.

PS: I apologize for the lack of status updates and brief email - my time for GHC has been in very short order the past two weeks in particular, and I've finally just returned to a computer (not mine) for right now to ask this.

PPS: This might also impact the 7.10 schedule, but last Simon and I talked, we thought perhaps shooting for ICFP this time (and actually hitting it) was a good plan. So I'd estimate on that a 7.8.4 might happen a few months from now, after summer.

-- Regards,

Austin Seipp, Haskell Consultant Well-Typed LLP, http://www.well-typed.com/ _______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Austin Seipp

12:27 p.m.

Hi Niklas, Yes, that patch looks great, thank you. The only reason it wasn't included in the list earlier was that the status was set to 'new', not to 'patch!' I'm afraid this is perhaps the most critical aspect necessary for me to recognize such tickets. I have marked it as patch, and it can go into 7.8.3, yes. (Let it be known that, essentially, as time moves forward, the probability of Austin forgetting a patch that is NOT marked appropriately on trac rapidly, rapidly approaches one - if you have a patch, please double-check that super-important 'status' field please!) On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 11:15 AM, Niklas Larsson wrote:

...

Hi!

It would be great if the patch I added on #9080 was put into 7.8.3 (well, I guess someone has to commit it to master first).

Niklas

2014-05-27 10:06 GMT+02:00 Austin Seipp :

...
Hello all,

After a long week, I've finally gotten a little time to reply to emails, and I mainly have one question I'd like to ask.

First, please direct your attention to this:

https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/query?status=closed&status=merge&status=patch&milestone=7.8.3&group=resolution&col=id&col=summary&col=owner&col=type&col=priority&col=component&col=version&order=priority

This is the 7.8.3 milestone, but it only considers things that are:

- 1) Fixed - 2) Going to be merged - 3) Are a patch to be still merged.

That is, it is a solid representation of the difference between 7.8.2 and the 7.8 branch tip.

The question is: when should we do the release? There are several bugs there that seem quite problematic for users - #9045, #7097, #9001, #8768 and #9078 in particular.

If these bugs are really problematic (and I sort of feel they are) then the release can happen soon. I can do it within a week from now, and we could punt more to a 7.8.4 release.

I ask this because my time to dedicate to GHC is a bit thin right now, so you must help me decide what's important! So please let me know - just a general vote in favor of doing it within some X timeframe (even 'real soon' or 'a week would be great') would be nice.

PS: I apologize for the lack of status updates and brief email - my time for GHC has been in very short order the past two weeks in particular, and I've finally just returned to a computer (not mine) for right now to ask this.

PPS: This might also impact the 7.10 schedule, but last Simon and I talked, we thought perhaps shooting for ICFP this time (and actually hitting it) was a good plan. So I'd estimate on that a 7.8.4 might happen a few months from now, after summer.

-- Regards,

Austin Seipp, Haskell Consultant Well-Typed LLP, http://www.well-typed.com/ _______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

-- Regards, Austin Seipp, Haskell Consultant Well-Typed LLP, http://www.well-typed.com/

Simon Marlow

30 May 30 May

5:46 p.m.

On 27/05/14 09:06, Austin Seipp wrote:

...

PPS: This might also impact the 7.10 schedule, but last Simon and I talked, we thought perhaps shooting for ICFP this time (and actually hitting it) was a good plan. So I'd estimate on that a 7.8.4 might happen a few months from now, after summer.

FWIW, I think doing 7.10 in October is way too soon. Major releases create a large distributed effort for package maintainers and users, and there are other knock-on effects, so we shouldn't do them too often. A lot of our users want stability, while many of them also want progress, and 12 months between major releases is the compromise we settled on. The last major release slipped for various reasons, but I don't believe that means we should try to get back on track by having a short time between 7.8 and 7.10. 7.8 will be out of maintenance when it has only just made it into a platform release. Anyway, that's my opinion. Of course if everyone says they don't mind a 7.10 in October then I withdraw my objection :-) (as a data point, upgrading to 7.8 at work cost me three weeks, but we're probably a special case) Cheers, Simon

George Colpitts

31 May 31 May

8:28 a.m.

+1 Stability is very important. Also, do we have an ETA for when we will have an improved infrastructure for automated builds and the associated tests. I think this would help a lot with stability and shorten the time to the next release. On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 6:46 PM, Simon Marlow wrote:

...

On 27/05/14 09:06, Austin Seipp wrote:

...
PPS: This might also impact the 7.10 schedule, but last Simon and I talked, we thought perhaps shooting for ICFP this time (and actually hitting it) was a good plan. So I'd estimate on that a 7.8.4 might happen a few months from now, after summer.

FWIW, I think doing 7.10 in October is way too soon. Major releases create a large distributed effort for package maintainers and users, and there are other knock-on effects, so we shouldn't do them too often. A lot of our users want stability, while many of them also want progress, and 12 months between major releases is the compromise we settled on.

The last major release slipped for various reasons, but I don't believe that means we should try to get back on track by having a short time between 7.8 and 7.10. 7.8 will be out of maintenance when it has only just made it into a platform release.

Anyway, that's my opinion. Of course if everyone says they don't mind a 7.10 in October then I withdraw my objection :-)

(as a data point, upgrading to 7.8 at work cost me three weeks, but we're probably a special case)

Cheers, Simon

_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs

Alain O'Dea

4:54 p.m.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 05/31/2014 12:28 PM, George Colpitts wrote:

...

+1

Stability is very important.

Also, do we have an ETA for when we will have an improved infrastructure for automated builds and the associated tests. I think this would help a lot with stability and shorten the time to the next release.

On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 6:46 PM, Simon Marlow mailto:marlowsd@gmail.com> wrote:

On 27/05/14 09:06, Austin Seipp wrote:

PPS: This might also impact the 7.10 schedule, but last Simon and I talked, we thought perhaps shooting for ICFP this time (and actually hitting it) was a good plan. So I'd estimate on that a 7.8.4 might happen a few months from now, after summer.

FWIW, I think doing 7.10 in October is way too soon. Major releases create a large distributed effort for package maintainers and users, and there are other knock-on effects, so we shouldn't do them too often. A lot of our users want stability, while many of them also want progress, and 12 months between major releases is the compromise we settled on.

The last major release slipped for various reasons, but I don't believe that means we should try to get back on track by having a short time between 7.8 and 7.10. 7.8 will be out of maintenance when it has only just made it into a platform release.

Anyway, that's my opinion. Of course if everyone says they don't mind a 7.10 in October then I withdraw my objection :-)

(as a data point, upgrading to 7.8 at work cost me three weeks, but we're probably a special case)

Cheers, Simon

Hi George: There are continuous builds of GHC HEAD on several platforms and architectures: http://haskell.inf.elte.hu/builders/ There are still some bugs to work out there for sure (particularly mine on SmartOS), but a lot of progress has been made. The most critical gap is the lack of Windows and OS X builders since they are Tier 1 platforms for GHC. If you have Windows or OS X machines available please consider offering a builder: https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/Builder Best, Alain -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEbBAEBAgAGBQJTikGBAAoJEP0rIXJNjNSA/KsH+I7mug5uqHDr5YzZJSPl0awS 1PudhQqnBLf8Op/IQuPR7lYZEsXNTUb+VU1vV0vEo8+nRAaueVlhffsXYe7YRRHF wQqA1WsmIfwwDsU2DkeVOhKMht9iB1eKC3vvsTEvZE8GJKvQZDTIeas5QtUki/i0 yuTPrRMZjf6IubsxeY90mlDCgpRMjRIWcRPm9fWj7c0wdzUNmMR0IPshMiXjZbbM US9hkoyuXUyYZrtn19vbPGNTss3gZJEqengyDNDyVNrEd4QXC8Us/dqbnbjrKPI3 8D9BbVTOyELJ44mFXmlcXT8DSfIYCAv/sS81sXNm4lQX3jhTOyx2hNa3jvqIrQ== =sZkd -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Jens Petersen

1 Jun 1 Jun

8:39 a.m.

(Sorry late response...) On 27 May 2014 17:06, Austin Seipp wrote:

...

just a general vote in favor of doing it within some X timeframe (even 'real soon' or 'a week would be great') would be nice.

+1 for 7.8.3 RSN :) I am planning to import ghc-7.8 into Fedora 21 soon so having 7.8.3 available now would be much better. Thanks, Jens

Carter Schonwald

2:01 p.m.

+1 on the RSN the Mvar and MkStableName bugs alone are pretty nasty for those who need those tools. On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 8:39 AM, Jens Petersen wrote:

...

(Sorry late response...)

On 27 May 2014 17:06, Austin Seipp wrote:

...
just a general vote in favor of doing it within some X timeframe (even 'real soon' or 'a week would be great') would be nice.

+1 for 7.8.3 RSN :)

I am planning to import ghc-7.8 into Fedora 21 soon so having 7.8.3 available now would be much better.

Thanks, Jens

_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs

Mateusz Kowalczyk

29 Jun 29 Jun

7:13 p.m.

On 05/27/2014 10:06 AM, Austin Seipp wrote:

...

Hello all,

After a long week, I've finally gotten a little time to reply to emails, and I mainly have one question I'd like to ask.

First, please direct your attention to this:

https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/query?status=closed&status=merge&status=patch&milestone=7.8.3&group=resolution&col=id&col=summary&col=owner&col=type&col=priority&col=component&col=version&order=priority

This is the 7.8.3 milestone, but it only considers things that are:

- 1) Fixed - 2) Going to be merged - 3) Are a patch to be still merged.

That is, it is a solid representation of the difference between 7.8.2 and the 7.8 branch tip.

The question is: when should we do the release? There are several bugs there that seem quite problematic for users - #9045, #7097, #9001, #8768 and #9078 in particular.

If these bugs are really problematic (and I sort of feel they are) then the release can happen soon. I can do it within a week from now, and we could punt more to a 7.8.4 release.

I ask this because my time to dedicate to GHC is a bit thin right now, so you must help me decide what's important! So please let me know - just a general vote in favor of doing it within some X timeframe (even 'real soon' or 'a week would be great') would be nice.

PS: I apologize for the lack of status updates and brief email - my time for GHC has been in very short order the past two weeks in particular, and I've finally just returned to a computer (not mine) for right now to ask this.

PPS: This might also impact the 7.10 schedule, but last Simon and I talked, we thought perhaps shooting for ICFP this time (and actually hitting it) was a good plan. So I'd estimate on that a 7.8.4 might happen a few months from now, after summer.

It has been a month since and the general opinion seems to have been Real Soon Now, are there any big blockers? -- Mateusz K.

Kazu Yamamoto

2 Jul 2 Jul

8:16 p.m.

Hi, I would like to the status of GHC 7.8.3, too. Thanks. --Kazu

...

On 05/27/2014 10:06 AM, Austin Seipp wrote:

...
Hello all,

After a long week, I've finally gotten a little time to reply to emails, and I mainly have one question I'd like to ask.

First, please direct your attention to this:

https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/query?status=closed&status=merge&status=patch&milestone=7.8.3&group=resolution&col=id&col=summary&col=owner&col=type&col=priority&col=component&col=version&order=priority

This is the 7.8.3 milestone, but it only considers things that are:

- 1) Fixed - 2) Going to be merged - 3) Are a patch to be still merged.

That is, it is a solid representation of the difference between 7.8.2 and the 7.8 branch tip.

The question is: when should we do the release? There are several bugs there that seem quite problematic for users - #9045, #7097, #9001, #8768 and #9078 in particular.

If these bugs are really problematic (and I sort of feel they are) then the release can happen soon. I can do it within a week from now, and we could punt more to a 7.8.4 release.

I ask this because my time to dedicate to GHC is a bit thin right now, so you must help me decide what's important! So please let me know - just a general vote in favor of doing it within some X timeframe (even 'real soon' or 'a week would be great') would be nice.

PS: I apologize for the lack of status updates and brief email - my time for GHC has been in very short order the past two weeks in particular, and I've finally just returned to a computer (not mine) for right now to ask this.

PPS: This might also impact the 7.10 schedule, but last Simon and I talked, we thought perhaps shooting for ICFP this time (and actually hitting it) was a good plan. So I'd estimate on that a 7.8.4 might happen a few months from now, after summer.

It has been a month since and the general opinion seems to have been Real Soon Now, are there any big blockers?

-- Mateusz K. _______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs

Simon Peyton Jones

3 Jul 3 Jul

1:57 a.m.

| I would like to the status of GHC 7.8.3, too. Thanks. Any day now. When I talked to Austin on Monday it was going to be Monday, then Tuesday. Maybe today. Austin: can you brief us? Thanks Simon | -----Original Message----- | From: ghc-devs [mailto:ghc-devs-bounces@haskell.org] On Behalf Of Kazu | Yamamoto | Sent: 03 July 2014 01:17 | To: ghc-devs@haskell.org | Subject: Re: GHC 7.8.3 release | | Hi, | | I would like to the status of GHC 7.8.3, too. Thanks. | | --Kazu | | > On 05/27/2014 10:06 AM, Austin Seipp wrote: | >> Hello all, | >> | >> After a long week, I've finally gotten a little time to reply to | >> emails, and I mainly have one question I'd like to ask. | >> | >> First, please direct your attention to this: | >> | >> | https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/query?status=closed&status=merge&sta | >> | tus=patch&milestone=7.8.3&group=resolution&col=id&col=summary&col=own | >> er&col=type&col=priority&col=component&col=version&order=priority | >> | >> This is the 7.8.3 milestone, but it only considers things that are: | >> | >> - 1) Fixed | >> - 2) Going to be merged | >> - 3) Are a patch to be still merged. | >> | >> That is, it is a solid representation of the difference between | 7.8.2 | >> and the 7.8 branch tip. | >> | >> The question is: when should we do the release? There are several | >> bugs there that seem quite problematic for users - #9045, #7097, | >> #9001, | >> #8768 and #9078 in particular. | >> | >> If these bugs are really problematic (and I sort of feel they are) | >> then the release can happen soon. I can do it within a week from | now, | >> and we could punt more to a 7.8.4 release. | >> | >> I ask this because my time to dedicate to GHC is a bit thin right | >> now, so you must help me decide what's important! So please let me | >> know - just a general vote in favor of doing it within some X | >> timeframe (even 'real soon' or 'a week would be great') would be | nice. | >> | >> PS: I apologize for the lack of status updates and brief email - my | >> time for GHC has been in very short order the past two weeks in | >> particular, and I've finally just returned to a computer (not mine) | >> for right now to ask this. | >> | >> PPS: This might also impact the 7.10 schedule, but last Simon and I | >> talked, we thought perhaps shooting for ICFP this time (and actually | >> hitting it) was a good plan. So I'd estimate on that a 7.8.4 might | >> happen a few months from now, after summer. | >> | > | > It has been a month since and the general opinion seems to have been | > Real Soon Now, are there any big blockers? | > | > -- | > Mateusz K. | > _______________________________________________ | > ghc-devs mailing list | > ghc-devs@haskell.org | > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs | _______________________________________________ | ghc-devs mailing list | ghc-devs@haskell.org | http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs

3974

Age (days ago)

4011

Last active (days ago)

List overview

Download

21 comments

13 participants

participants (13)

Alain O'Dea
Austin Seipp
Carter Schonwald
George Colpitts
Herbert Valerio Riedel
Jens Petersen
Kazu Yamamoto
Manuel M T Chakravarty
Mateusz Kowalczyk
Niklas Larsson
Simon Marlow
Simon Peyton Jones
Yitzchak Gale

GHC 7.8.3 release

tags

participants (13)