Moving Haddock *development* out of GHC tree

Mateusz Kowalczyk fuuzetsu at
Fri Aug 8 15:20:13 UTC 2014

On 08/08/2014 10:59 AM, Luite Stegeman wrote:
> I'm also in favour of a more decoupled development/release process. I'd
> like to change a few things in haddock to make it more suitable for use as
> a library, so that I can set up a haddock for GHCJS without duplicating the
> whole package (it needs a custom platform setup and some changes in file
> name handling). It'd be great if such a release could be made independently
> of GHC and changes like this could be made without requiring the user to
> update their GHC.

Note that while we can release more often, if we have to bump an
interface file version and changes are incompatible, that's probably our
cut-off point for compatibility. This might be three stable releases or
one minor. I don't expect it to change soon anyhow.

> Also I'd be happy to do some of the work for the out-of-tree change, for
> example backporting fixes to the 2.14 branch or updating the 2.15 branch to
> work with the 7.8 api (but I can't promise more, GHCJS is taking enough of
> my time, and I'm not sure how much time I can afford to keep spending on
> it, so I'd like to minimize my other maintenance tasks as much as possible).

Once this discussion goes through, I'll put what I can on 2.14, release
and abandon the branch continuing from master (2.15). Updating (or
rather downgrading) the master to work with 7.8.3 should not be a
problem, I think the changes API weren't numerous.

> luite

Mateusz K.

More information about the ghc-devs mailing list