[GHC-Releases] GHC 9.10 release schedule and core library status

[Julian Ospald]

I'm still totally ignorant of what versions of filepath, unix and os-string are going to be included.

Can the communication be improved? Where are the upstream tickets? Where do I see an overview of the status?

On February 20, 2024 1:11:09 AM UTC, Andrew Lelechenko <andrew.lelechenko at gmail.com> wrote:
>Thanks, Ben, for pushing through version bumps for `filepath` and `containers`. We also released new versions of `bytestring` and `text` last week. 
>
>Mikolaj, what’s the schedule for Cabal 3.12? https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/-/wikis/GHC-status#11-major-releases says that all major releases should be reflected as submodules in GHC source tree before GHC fork date, which is AFAIU this Friday.
>
>Best regards,
>Andrew
>
>> On 23 Jan 2024, at 08:32, Mikolaj Konarski <mikolaj at well-typed.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> * Mikolaj, are we looking for Cabal 3.12 or carrying on with 3.10.3+? There are at least two important features missing from Cabal 3.10: semaphores and multiple home units.
>> 
>> We plan to have Cabal 3.12 in time.
>> 
>> On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 12:59 AM Andrew Lelechenko
>> <andrew.lelechenko at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Thanks, Ben. (I’m not subscribed to mail lists CC’d, so I expect this reply to be missing from them)
>>> 
>>> CC’ng Matthew Craven on behalf of bytestring, Xia Li-yao on behalf of text, Lei Zhu, Carsten König and Miao ZhiCheng on behalf of array (it’s not orphaned).
>>> 
>>> Several blockers from the top of my head:
>>> 
>>> * Bump containers submodule to 0.7, long overdue. AFAIR blocked on https://github.com/judah/haskeline/pull/186 - Ben, are you able to merge it?
>>> 
>>> * Bump filepath submodule to 1.5 and add os-string to boot libraries. Julian might remember better, but AFAIR there are no blockers, just someone has to upgrade several submodules at once.
>>> 
>>> * GHCJS progress depends on merging outstanding PRs for bytestring and text to provide pure Haskell implementations, and I imagine Sylvain (CC’d) would wish them to be merged and released before GHC 9.10 is forked.
>>> 
>>> * Mikolaj, are we looking for Cabal 3.12 or carrying on with 3.10.3+? There are at least two important features missing from Cabal 3.10: semaphores and multiple home units.
>>> 
>>> Best regards,
>>> Andrew
>>> 
>>> On 22 Jan 2024, at 16:00, Ben Gamari <ben at well-typed.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi all,
>>> 
>>> First, apologies for the silence regarding the 9.10 fork; I was hoping
>>> to improve our communications with boot library authors in the run-up to
>>> GHC 9.10 but illness unfortunately took me largely out of commission for
>>> a first few weeks of the year. Happily, things are looking rosier now.
>>> 
>>> Having had a chance to look at the 9.10 branch and the release goals, I
>>> am planning to cut the fork for GHC 9.10 around a month from today, on
>>> 23 Februrary 2024. This leaves around a month of time to merge the
>>> `ghc-internals` split and a few of the other bits of work that remain
>>> outstanding. We anticipate the first alpha release will come a week
>>> after the fork (see the Milestone [1] for further details).
>>> 
>>> How does this sound to you?
>>> 
>>> For organizational purposes, it would be helpful if we designated a
>>> coordinating maintainer for each of our boot packagers for the 9.10 release.
>>> My understanding is that our boot libraries have the following primary
>>> maintainers but don't hesitate to let me know if you believe this to be
>>> incorrect:
>>> 
>>> | Package         | Maintainer                 |
>>> | --------------- | -------------------------- |
>>> | Cabal           | Mikolaj Konarski           |
>>> | Win32           | Tamar Christina            |
>>> | array           | (orphaned)                 |
>>> | binary          | Lennart Kolmodin?          |
>>> | bytestring      | Andrew Lelechanko          |
>>> | containers      | David Feuer                |
>>> | deepseq         | Melanie Phoenix            |
>>> | directory       | Phil Rufflewind            |
>>> | exceptions      | Ryan Scott                 |
>>> | filepath        | Julian Ospald              |
>>> | haddock         | Hecate                     |
>>> | haskeline       | Judah Jacobson             |
>>> | hpc             | David Binder               |
>>> | mtl             | Emily Pillmore             |
>>> | parsec          | Oleg Grenrus               |
>>> | process         | Michael Snoyman            |
>>> | stm             | Simon Marlow               |
>>> | terminfo        | Judah Jacobson             |
>>> | text            | Andrew Lelechanko          |
>>> | time            | Ashley Yakeley             |
>>> | transformers    | Ross Paterson              |
>>> | unix            | Julian Ospald              |
>>> 
>>> It would be great if each maintainer could let me know what they would
>>> like to do for the 9.10 release. In general we would love to have the
>>> set of boot libraries pinned down at least in version by the second
>>> alpha, which we are planning for the second week of March 2024. Does
>>> this sound reasonable?
>>> 
>>> As always, I would encourage core library maintainers to be conservative
>>> in their plans for a GHC release and avoid introducing major features or
>>> refactorings in their release. Such changes both add risk to the release
>>> schedule and complicate the users' migration paths; consequently, they
>>> are ideally best held for releases asynchronous to the GHC release
>>> process.
>>> 
>>> Thanks again for all of your work!
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> 
>>> - Ben
>>> 
>>> 
>>> [1] https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/-/milestones/380#tab-issues
>>> 
>>> 
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-releases/attachments/20240223/0f57f05b/attachment-0001.html>