From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marius Bakke Subject: Re: Stackage LTS 14 (was: Adding Purescript) Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2019 19:59:40 +0200 Message-ID: <87ftjjwdf7.fsf@devup.no> References: <87mudt7h7a.fsf@ngyro.com> <87a79tj8mq.fsf@elephly.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:35269) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iNKvC-0000EF-C3 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 23 Oct 2019 13:59:47 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iNKvB-0007JX-5b for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 23 Oct 2019 13:59:46 -0400 Received: from wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com ([64.147.123.24]:44675) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iNKvA-0007J5-Mt for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 23 Oct 2019 13:59:45 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87a79tj8mq.fsf@elephly.net> List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Ricardo Wurmus , Timothy Sample Cc: guix-devel --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ricardo Wurmus writes: > Hi Timothy, > >> One of the things I want to do this time is to do the upgrade in one >> mega commit. I=E2=80=99m pretty sure that some of the commits last time= had >> inconsistent package sets, which is not ideal. I=E2=80=99m not sure how= to >> avoid that upgrading one package at a time. Hence, my rough plan is to >> start by setting GHC 8.6 as the compiler for the build system, and then >> run the refresh script with Stackage LTS 14. After that, I will push >> the results to wip-haskell-updates and see how it goes. >> >> Ricardo, what do you think? Are we okay to take over >> wip-haskell-updates? Does a mega commit make sense or do you think >> that=E2=80=99s a bad idea? > > Yes, you can take over wip-haskell-updates. > > A single big commit is not a good idea, but you don=E2=80=99t really need= it as > you=E2=80=99d merge the branch in one go, so Cuirass would not end up eva= luating > any of the intermediate commits anyway. It=E2=80=99s still good to have = smaller > commits to better undo individual changes and more easily understand > related changes. AIUI individual updates cannot really be un-done, because that would break the entire dependency chain. I think it's OK to "squash" instances like this, both to clarify that the changes are in fact related, and to make bisecting less painful. --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCgAdFiEEu7At3yzq9qgNHeZDoqBt8qM6VPoFAl2wlQwACgkQoqBt8qM6 VPrTcgf/RaHzDN92bL2G+9YBwACIYd9rChqygLkF8OthJdeC1by4a90XwKS9dNVO vEFKh4iKDGYG/oQl6Po0jO8HBin0756XHDv4rvlyw0//X7e4aPXlpxjQ4I/6Hh4Y YWkQDJVI23UNYFi0sa3UBgbKzosXXzs67jH9j6RDdfe04mhqvYGWljUaP9gsOg+F ek2552hLlVo8j8eHh7TPFkToxeaSDJgmwRxgtv3HLuME7KGW5VqeD470m4aAM1Z+ PkNmgrLCmG7+/gti+Bz0aVa3Gd2bBgpUk1AKfkxffGiYJ+dY0toURYD/iC6pSiOs oyMK432ei1+mnl8Y1Bsjyn+3OPc7AA== =a+NJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--