Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

how can we use cabal.projects but avoid having huge rebuilds for testing the primitive package? #5354

Open
cartazio opened this issue May 30, 2018 · 5 comments

Comments

@cartazio
Copy link
Contributor

haskell/primitive@85d6c2f is a stable link to the tip of current master as of this point in question

https://github.com/haskell/primitive/blob/85d6c2f07b88d6e97f08dc84e4beca4a0f77c377/cabal.project is the current flavor of cabal.project

we'd actually be totally ok with vector/statistics/the various testing libs packages to privately depend on older/released primitive... but at the moment we can't do that and thus any changes to primitive trigger a massive rebuild on a whole bunch of stuff. And we can't make use of cabal test/new-test or cabal benchmark/new-benchmark :(

@cartazio
Copy link
Contributor Author

cc @hv @RyanGlScott @andrewthad

@andrewthad
Copy link
Contributor

What we've done so far is just test and benchmark libraries that don't have a lot of deps. I even added flags to quickcheck-classes to disable dependencies that weren't needed for primitive's tests. I'm unaware of a better workaround.

@cartazio
Copy link
Contributor Author

indeed. but better things would be better. and i'm sure while our problem is excaccerbated by being such a "wide spread" dep, its not a unique example. and it does motivate one example of private version deps

@quasicomputational
Copy link
Contributor

This is obviously not a permanent solution, but maybe it would be less painful to rename the package while it's being tested and benchmarked (e.g. to primitive-dev before running cabal new-test, then remembering to change back to primitive before committing).

@23Skidoo
Copy link
Member

23Skidoo commented Jun 8, 2018

Looks like basically the same issue as #1575.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants