Moving hadrian to submodule

[Boespflug, Mathieu]

Great! A submodule makes a lot more sense to me, at least short term. I
would hope that medium term the development processes of GHC-as-a-whole and
Hadrian(-a-part-of-GHC) can converge, so that a submodule is no longer
necessary. Submodules do have their downsides and it would be odd for such
a core part as the build system to be kept external to the main repo.

--
Mathieu Boespflug
Founder at http://tweag.io.

On 8 December 2017 at 20:10, Ara Adkins <me at ara.io> wrote:

> Sounds good! Hopefully this doesn’t cause a flood of commit messages.
>
> _ara
>
> > On 8 Dec 2017, at 18:50, Ben Gamari <ben at well-typed.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hello everyone,
> >
> > A bit over a month ago we merged hadrian into the ghc tree as a subtree.
> > Unfortunately, those working on Hadrian have found the subtree mechanism
> > to provide a rather poor developer experience. Consequently, today I
> > will be ripping out the subtree and replacing it with a submodule.
> >
> > After pulling the commit performing this change you will likely need to
> > do the following to emplace the new submodule,
> >
> >    $ git submodule update --init
> >    $ git -C hadrian checkout .
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > - Ben
> > _______________________________________________
> > ghc-devs mailing list
> > ghc-devs at haskell.org
> > http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
> _______________________________________________
> ghc-devs mailing list
> ghc-devs at haskell.org
> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-devs/attachments/20171208/d5fecfef/attachment.html>