GHC 7.8 release?
Christian Höner zu Siederdissen
choener at tbi.univie.ac.at
Thu Feb 7 20:13:27 CET 2013
Hi Simon,
The download page already has a big "Stop" there.
http://www.haskell.org/ghc/download_ghc_7_6_2
Apart from that, I am /really/ looking forward to sse/avx extensions and
the official new-code-gen to further narrow the gap between
high-performance C and high-performance Haskell.
That being said, I would be fine using HEAD, but a release is very
convenient in terms of installing, even if they are in the form of "rc"
(which I typically install to see if something breaks or is faster).
Maybe you want to consider providing a couple of release candidates
instead of 7.8 now?
Gruss,
Christian
* Simon Peyton Jones <simonpj at microsoft.com> [07.02.2013 19:25]:
> It's fairly simple in my mind. There are two "channels" (if I understand
> Mark's terminology right):
>
>
>
> . Haskell Platform:
>
> o A stable development environment, lots of libraries known to work
>
> o Newcomers, and people who value stability, should use the Haskell
> Platform
>
> o HP comes with a particular version of GHC, probably not the hottest
> new one, but that doesn't matter. It works.
>
>
>
> . GHC home page downloads:
>
> o More features but not so stable
>
> o Libraries not guaranteed to work
>
> o Worth releasing, though, as a forcing function to fix bugs, and as a
> checkpoint for people to test, so that by the time the HP adopts a
> particular version it is reasonably solid.
>
>
>
> So we already have the two channels Mark asks for, don't we? One is
> called the Haskell Platform and one is called the GHC home page.
>
> That leaves a PR issue: we really don't want newcomers or Joe Users
> wanting the "new shiny". They want the Haskell Platform, and as Mark says
> those users should not pay the slightest attention until it appears in the
> Haskell Platform.
>
>
>
> So perhaps we principally need a way to point people away from GHC and
> towards HP? eg We could prominently say at every download point "Stop!
> Are you sure you want this? You might be better off with the Haskell
> Platform! Here's why...".
>
>
>
> Have I understood aright? If so, how could we achieve the right social
> dynamics?
>
>
>
> Our goal is to let people who value stability get stability, while the
> hot-shots race along in a different channel and pay the price of flat
> tires etc.
>
>
>
> PS: absolutely right to use 7.6.2 for the next HP. Don't even think about
> 7.8.
>
>
>
> Simon
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Mark Lentczner [mailto:mark.lentczner at gmail.com]
> Sent: 07 February 2013 17:43
> To: Simon Peyton-Jones
> Cc: andreas.voellmy at gmail.com; Carter Schonwald; GHC users; Simon Marlow;
> parallel-haskell; kostirya at gmail.com; Edsko de Vries; ghc-devs at haskell.org
> Subject: Re: GHC 7.8 release?
>
>
>
> I'd say the window for 7.8 in the platform is about closed. If 7.8 were to
> be release in the next two weeks that would be just about the least amount
> of time I'd want to see for libraries in the platform to get all stable
> with the GHC version. And we'd also be counting on the GHC team to be
> quickly responding to bugs so that there could be a point release of 7.8
> mid-April. Historically, none of that seems likely.
>
>
>
> So my current trajectory is to base HP 2013.2.0.0 on GHC 7.6.2.
>
>
>
> Since 7.8 will seems like it will be released before May, we will be faced
> again with the bad public relations issue: Everyone will want the new
> shiny and be confused as to why the platform is such a laggard. We'll see
> four reactions:
>
> o New comers who are starting out and figure they should use the
> latest... Many will try to use 7.8, half the libraries on hackage
> won't work, things will be wonky, and they'll have a poor experience.
> o People doing production / project work will stay on 7.6 and ignore 7.8
> for a few months.
> o The small group of people exploring the frontiers will know how to get
> things set up and be happy.
> o Eventually library authors will get around to making sure their stuff
> will work with it.
>
> I wish GHC would radically change it's release process. Things like 7.8
> shouldn't be release as "7.8". That sounds major and stable. The web site
> will have 7.8 at the top. The warning to use the platform will fall flat
> because it makes the platform look out of date. Really, "7.8" should be in
> a different release channel, not on the front page. It should bake in that
> channel for six months - where only the third group of people will use it,
> until it is getting close to merge into main, at which point the fourth
> group will start to use it, so that the day it hits main, all the
> libraries just work. Ideally, the first two groups of people will not pay
> the slightest attention to it until it is further baked.
>
>
>
> While we achievements of the GHC team are great, less than half of those
> 7.8 features seem interesting from the viewpoint of the aims of
> the platform. I don't think adding syntactic or type-level features are
> really all that important for Haskell at this juncture. And while I do
> like to see improvements in generated code and run-time performance, I
> think even those are less important than making crucial ecosystem
> improvements to things like package management, cross-compilation, and
> libraries.
>
>
>
> - Mark
> _______________________________________________
> Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
> Glasgow-haskell-users at haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/glasgow-haskell-users/attachments/20130207/04f923a1/attachment.pgp>
More information about the Glasgow-haskell-users
mailing list