Relocating (some of) GHC's core-libraries to

Herbert Valerio Riedel hvriedel at
Mon Apr 28 08:32:48 UTC 2014

Hello Simon,

On 2014-04-28 at 10:16:39 +0200, Simon Marlow wrote:
> So let me check that I'm understanding correctly.  Right now the
> source of truth for these repos is under, and
> you're proposing that we move the source of truth to github.  In
> addition we would still need the repos, but they
> would become lagging repos tracking the github upstream?

> So the situation for pushing to these repos becomes more complex,
> becuase we have to push to upstream first, then the lagging repo, and
> finally update the submodule link.

Yes, that'd be the extreme case (and we have that kind of complexity
already for packages such as transformers/time, where we even have to
bridge the darcs/git gap)

However, we can configure the lagged mirror such that we'd automatically
mirror github's 'master' branch into our lagged mirror (we'd still be
free to create local wip/* or ghc-7.10 branches at if

Then you'd only have to do the 2-step workflow, i.e. updating github's
master branch (or for more experimental stuff, a
wip/ branch), and update the gitlink in ghc.git

> I've no objection to hosting issue trackers on github, but I'm
> concerned about the repo structure and the workflow for pushing
> becoming more complex.

I'd like to point out, that while it will become more complex in one way
or another (if we want to get away from the current loosely-coupled
sub-repo setup), breaking changes in GHC HEAD requiring immediate action
happen rather infrequently (after all, we tend to avoid such breakages
in the first place, as they'd usually affect a larger portion of Hackage
then as well)

More information about the ghc-devs mailing list