Moving Haddock *development* out of GHC tree

Mateusz Kowalczyk fuuzetsu at
Thu Aug 14 21:30:43 UTC 2014

On 08/13/2014 11:09 PM, Mateusz Kowalczyk wrote:
> On 08/08/2014 06:25 AM, Mateusz Kowalczyk wrote:
>> Hello,
>> [snip]
>> Transition from current setup:
>> If I receive some patches I was promised then I will then make a 2.14.4
>> bugfix/compat release make sure that master is up to date and then
>> create something like GHC-tracking branch from master and track that. I
>> will then abandon that branch and not push to it unless it is GHC
>> release time. The next commit in master will bring Haddock to a state
>> where it works with 7.8.3: yes, this means removing all new API stuff
>> until 7.10 or 7.8.4 or whatever. GHC API changes go onto GHC-tracking
>> while all the stuff I write goes master. When GHC makes a release or is
>> about to, I make master work with that and make GHC-tracking point to
>> that instead.
>> Thanks!
> So it is now close to a week gone and I have received many positive
> replies and no negative ones. I will probably execute what I stated
> initially at about this time tomorrow.
> To reiterate in short:
> 1. I make sure what we have now compiles with GHC HEAD and I stick it in
> separate branch which GHC folk will now track and apply any API patches
> to. Unless something changes by tomorrow, this will most likely be what
> master is at right now, perhaps with a single change to the version in
> cabal file.
> 2. I make the master branch work with 7.8.3 (and possibly 7.8.x) and do
> development without worrying about any API changes in HEAD, releasing as
> often as I need to.
> 3. At GHC release time, I update master with API changes so that
> up-to-date Haddock is ready to be used to generate the docs and ship
> with the compiler.
> I don't know what the GHC branch name will be yet. ‘ghc-head’ makes most
> sense but IIRC Herbert had some objections as it had been used in the
> past for something else, but maybe he can pitch in.
> The only thing I require from GHC folk is to simply use that branch and
> not push/pull to/from master unless contributing feature patches or
> trying to port some fixes into HEAD version for whatever reason.
> Thanks!

The deed is done, the branch to pull/push to/from if you're doing GHC
API work is ‘ghc-head’. ‘master’ is now a development branch against
7.8.3. When the time comes for 7.10, I can simply re-apply the fixes +
anything from ‘ghc-head’ at that time.

You only need to concern yourself with this if you ever push to Haddock.

Mateusz K.

More information about the ghc-devs mailing list