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

Get a release in shape #16

Closed
wants to merge 4 commits into from
Closed

Get a release in shape #16

wants to merge 4 commits into from

Conversation

sjakobi
Copy link

@sjakobi sjakobi commented Mar 14, 2018

@lpsmith: I have asked @jaspervdj to make a release as there has been so little indication that you would do it reasonably soon.

I hope that you can understand this as there are so many people waiting! :)

sjakobi added 2 commits March 14, 2018 19:45
Tests pass with GHC-7.0.4 up to GHC-8.4.1.
@DanBurton
Copy link

I have built & tested this against lts-11 (ghc 8.2) and nightly-2018-03-14 (ghc 8.4). It builds and the tests pass on both.

@sjakobi
Copy link
Author

sjakobi commented Mar 14, 2018

I pulled back a commit to make the Semigroup instance unconditional because I got a funky build error with GHC-7.0. Let me fix that first.

@jaspervdj
Copy link
Collaborator

Thanks a lot for the work @sjakobi! After some discussion I think an unconditional instance with an

if !impl(ghc >= 8.0)
  build-depends: semigroups == 0.18.*

So we don't introduce the dependency overhead on recent GHCs. Ping me when you want to discuss or if you want me to upload the release.

@sjakobi
Copy link
Author

sjakobi commented Mar 14, 2018

03ff5b0 works for GHC-7.0.4 upwards.

build-depends: semigroups == 0.18.*

@jaspervdj: Is there a reason for the constraint or is that simply a preference?

@hvr
Copy link

hvr commented Mar 14, 2018

Is there a reason for the constraint or is that simply a preference?

mostly preference; if you can prove that it can be relaxed downwards, feel free to relax.

@sjakobi
Copy link
Author

sjakobi commented Mar 14, 2018

This way it still works with LTS-2 :)

@jaspervdj
Copy link
Collaborator

Thanks again for all the work @sjakobi and @DanBurton! I have merged this to my fork and uploaded a release.

This PR should be closed. I will open a new PR to get the changes in my fork back upstream.

@jaspervdj jaspervdj mentioned this pull request Mar 14, 2018
@sjakobi
Copy link
Author

sjakobi commented Mar 14, 2018

Thanks for stepping up, @jaspervdj!

@sjakobi sjakobi closed this Mar 14, 2018
@sjakobi sjakobi deleted the release branch March 14, 2018 23:36
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants