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/

+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

For me upgrading to 7.8 was very easy. The release slippage actually helped out with that. 7.8 had already been specified well enough and already had some active users for a long time. This made for a long window for package maintainers to update their packages to have 7.8 compatibility. Perhaps October is a good timeline to try to cut an initial alpha release that specifies the interface for package authors to compile against, but the actual release can wait until later. On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 2:46 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

_______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users