From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=)
Subject: Re: ghc 8
Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2016 11:20:28 +0200
Message-ID: <87r38woylf.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <87y437u61m.fsf@we.make.ritual.n0.is> <87a8fni9xp.fsf@gnu.org>
	<87bn02zl29.fsf@we.make.ritual.n0.is>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:46461)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1bhZ25-0002Fb-ES
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 07 Sep 2016 05:20:38 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1bhZ20-0008Qw-9h
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 07 Sep 2016 05:20:36 -0400
In-Reply-To: <87bn02zl29.fsf@we.make.ritual.n0.is> (ng0@we.make.ritual.n0.is's
	message of "Mon, 05 Sep 2016 10:40:30 +0000")
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
	<guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: "Guix-devel" <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
To: ng0 <ng0@we.make.ritual.n0.is>
Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org

ng0 <ng0@we.make.ritual.n0.is> skribis:

> Ludovic Court=C3=A8s <ludo@gnu.org> writes:
>
>> ng0 <ng0@we.make.ritual.n0.is> skribis:
>>
>>> should we package ghc 8 in core-updates? It was released in May:
>>> https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/blog/ghc-8.0.1-released
>>
>> Probably a good idea.  :-)
>>
>> This can be done in =E2=80=98master=E2=80=99, or, if we change to defaul=
t GHC, to a
>> dedicated =E2=80=98ghc-update=E2=80=99 branch.
>>
>> Ludo=E2=80=99.
>
> Should this replace current ghc? I don't know how much of our current
> (gnu packages haskell) would break.

No idea.  I suppose we take this route:

  1. First you test a sample of ghc-* packages and build them to see if
     there=E2=80=99s obvious breakage.

  2. If not, we commit the GHC upgrade in a branch and let Hydra build
     the branch.

  3. We fix package breaks that we notice on the branch.

  4. Merge the branch.

How does that sound?

Ludo=E2=80=99.