GHC 7.8 release?

[Richard Eisenberg]

Geoff's reasoning seems quite sound.
+1 for February release.

On Feb 7, 2013, at 3:50 AM, Geoffrey Mainland <mainland at apeiron.net> wrote:

> In practice the versions of GHC that are widely used are those that are
> included in the platform. Maybe we should coordinate with their next
> release? They are targeting a May 6 release, and the release process is
> starting March 4, so it sounds like the original GHC release plan
> (February release) would be a good fit for the platform as it would
> allow library writers to catch up and ensure that STABLE was tested
> enough for inclusion in the platform. It would be a shame to miss the
> platform release.
> 
> Geoff
> 
> On 02/07/2013 08:25 AM, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
>> Dear GHC users, 
>> 
>> *                                                                                                                  
>> *
>> 
>> *Carter*: Will this RTS update make it into ghc 7.8 update thats coming
>> up in the next monthish?
>> 
>> *Andreas*: We are almost there - we are now trying to sort out a problem
>> on mac os x. It would be helpful to know if there is a cutoff date for
>> getting things into 7.8. 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Simon, Ian, and I have just been discussing 7.8, and would be interested
>> in what you guys think. 
>> 
>> 
>> At ICFP we speculated that we’d make a release of GHC soon after
>> Christmas to embody tons of stuff that has been included since 7.6,
>> specifically:
>> 
>> ·         major improvements in DPH (vectorisation avoidance, new
>> vectoriser)
>> 
>> ·         type holes
>> 
>> ·         rebindable list syntax
>> 
>> ·         major changes to the type inference engine
>> 
>> ·         type level natural numbers
>> 
>> ·         overlapping type families
>> 
>> ·         the new code generator
>> 
>> ·         support for vector (SSE/AVX) instructions
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Whenever it comes it would definitely be great to include Andreas &
>> friends’ work:
>> 
>> ·         Scheduler changes to the RTS to improve latency
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> The original major reason for proposing a post-Xmas release was to get
>> DPH in a working state out into the wild.  However, making a proper
>> release imposes costs on everyone else.  Library authors have to scurry
>> around to make their libraries work, etc.   Some of the new stuff hasn’t
>> been in HEAD for that long, and hence has not been very thoroughly
>> tested.   (But of course making a release unleashes a huge wave of
>> testing that doesn’t happen otherwise.)
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> So another alternative is to leave it all as HEAD, and wait another few
>> months before making a release.  You can still use all the new stuff by
>> compiling HEAD, or grabbing a snapshot distribution.  And it makes it
>> hard for the Haskell platform if GHC moves too fast. Many people are
>> still on 7.4.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> There seem to be pros and cons each way.  I don’t have a strong
>> opinion.  If you have a view, let us know.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Simon
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
> Glasgow-haskell-users at haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
>