Updating Haddock submodule
Simon Peyton Jones
simonpj at microsoft.com
Thu Jul 17 06:54:32 UTC 2014
| what you are looking for?
Yes, it's the right kind of thing. I failed to find that, apologies. But
- the page is advertised as work in progress
- it checks out 'master'. Is that always right? perhaps not (see my comments)
- it assumes you have anticipated the need for change before you do them
Much more likely is my situation in which I altered my tree and then thought
"oh now I have to commit"
- it's at the bottom of a long page, most of which is irrelevant if you use ./sync-all (I think??)
More generally I think I just need a bit more hand-holding for this process. Examples of expected output at the various stages would be useful. (I didn't include those in my writeup, but I should have.)
| Basically in step 12, you do your GHC hacking. Git should also show you
| a one line change with a commit reference which is your updated
| You should commit that as well.
There's an example of the need for an example. How does it display that one line change? What command makes it do so.
| Not sure why you have step 14, it seems to me that you should be good
| after 13. At step 14 you will already be pointing to the appropriate
| commit, it will just happen to be the same as the master branch at that
| point too so I think you're done.
OK. But the current page clearly states that submodules should be in a detatched-head state, and it plainly isn't at that moment. Perhaps that's fine, but an unequivaocal statement that it's fine would be super helpful.
I'm *not* complaining -- just trying to articulate explicitly what would be helpful to me (or other ill-informed people) next time.
| Mateusz K.
| ghc-devs mailing list
| ghc-devs at haskell.org
More information about the ghc-devs