Tentative high-level plans for 7.10.1
jwlato at gmail.com
Mon Oct 6 23:22:09 UTC 2014
On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 5:38 PM, Johan Tibell <johan.tibell at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 11:28 AM, Herbert Valerio Riedel <
> hvriedel at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 2014-10-06 at 11:03:19 +0200, p.k.f.holzenspies at utwente.nl wrote:
>> > The danger, of course, is that people aren't very enthusiastic about
>> > bug-fixing older versions of a compiler, but for
>> > language/compiler-uptake, this might actually be a Better Way.
>> Maybe some of the commercial GHC users might be interested in donating
>> the manpower to maintain older GHC versions. It's mostly a
>> time-consuming QA & auditing process to maintain old GHCs.
> What can we do to make that process cheaper? In particular, which are the
> manual steps in making a new GHC release today?
I would very much like to know this as well. For ghc-7.8.3 there were a
number of people volunteering manpower to finish up the release, but to the
best of my knowledge those offers weren't taken up, which makes me think
that the extra overhead for coordinating more people would outweigh any
gains. From the outside, it appears that the process/workflow could use
some improvement, perhaps in ways that would make it simpler to divide up
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the ghc-devs