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

Temporarily revert #7995 and #7921 due to #8208 #8321

Merged
merged 17 commits into from
Jul 25, 2022

Conversation

Mikolaj
Copy link
Member

@Mikolaj Mikolaj commented Jul 25, 2022

Yet another approach to (commit by commit) approach reverting #7995 on 3.8 branch due to #8208 and the 3.8 tag-for-GHC deadline.

This is made painful by the fact that we got sloppy and didn't rebase a subsequent PR and so the overall merge got complex instead of fast-forward. Also, some other PRs (at least one, but probably more) actually depend on this PR.

Based on #8319 (comment) I'm also reverting #7921 and, so far, this results in no revert conflicts. Let's see the CI.

Mikolaj added 17 commits July 25, 2022 17:58
This reverts commit aa4f0ad.
This reverts commit 91fa33b.
@Mikolaj Mikolaj changed the title Revert 7995 and 7921 Revert #7995 and #7921 due to #8208 Jul 25, 2022
@Mikolaj Mikolaj changed the title Revert #7995 and #7921 due to #8208 Temporarily revert #7995 and #7921 due to #8208 Jul 25, 2022
@Mikolaj Mikolaj requested review from robx and jneira July 25, 2022 17:17
Copy link
Member

@jneira jneira left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

it is a pity to have to revert two PRS, I hope the can be reapplied after the release, with a test over windows or manually testing it

@jneira
Copy link
Member

jneira commented Jul 25, 2022

hmm just I ve seen it is against 3.8 so it should be fixed on master

@Mikolaj
Copy link
Member Author

Mikolaj commented Jul 25, 2022

I hoped we can keep it on master and fix it quickly on master, so we only need to revert on 3.8. Do you think that many Windows users are building straight from master branch? Or is treating the branches differently a bad idea for another reason?

@jneira
Copy link
Member

jneira commented Jul 25, 2022

nah agree on trying to fix it in master, will keep the issue opened to track it, thanks for take care!

@Mikolaj Mikolaj added the merge me Tell Mergify Bot to merge label Jul 25, 2022
@Mikolaj
Copy link
Member Author

Mikolaj commented Jul 25, 2022

I think mergify doesn't permit skipping the delay for non-backports, so let me merge manually.

@Mikolaj Mikolaj merged commit ba8db78 into haskell:3.8 Jul 25, 2022
@jneira
Copy link
Member

jneira commented Jul 25, 2022

I've tested the artifact generated by this prjust incase and ctrl+c works fine, as expected

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
attention: needs-review merge me Tell Mergify Bot to merge
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants