Skip to content

bump known ghc versions in cabal library #8260

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jul 14, 2022
Merged

bump known ghc versions in cabal library #8260

merged 3 commits into from
Jul 14, 2022

Conversation

gbaz
Copy link
Collaborator

@gbaz gbaz commented Jul 1, 2022

Resolves #8230

@gbaz gbaz added this to the Considered for 3.8 milestone Jul 1, 2022
andreasabel
andreasabel reviewed Jul 1, 2022
View reviewed changes
Cabal/src/Distribution/Simple/GHC.hs
warn verbosity $
"Unknown/unsupported 'ghc' version detected "
++ "(Cabal " ++ prettyShow cabalVersion ++ " supports 'ghc' version < 9.4): "
++ "(Cabal " ++ prettyShow cabalVersion ++ " supports 'ghc' version < 9.6): "
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can this constant (now 9.6) be factored out so that there is a single place where it has to be changed?

@Mikolaj Mikolaj mentioned this pull request Jul 1, 2022
Closed
@Mikolaj
Copy link
Member

Mikolaj commented Jul 8, 2022

@Mergifyio rebase

@mergify
Copy link
Contributor

mergify bot commented Jul 8, 2022

rebase

✅ Branch has been successfully rebased

@andreabedini andreabedini force-pushed the gb/bump-ghc-known-versions-to-9.4 branch from a3c3240 to 19ef31d Compare July 8, 2022 11:47
@gbaz gbaz added the squash+merge me Tell Mergify Bot to squash-merge label Jul 14, 2022
emilypi
emilypi approved these changes Jul 14, 2022
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@emilypi emilypi left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

bump first, bikeshed later

@gbaz
Copy link
Collaborator Author

gbaz commented Jul 14, 2022

@Mergifyio backport 3.8

@mergify
Copy link
Contributor

mergify bot commented Jul 14, 2022

backport 3.8

🟠 Waiting for conditions to match

  • merged [:pushpin: backport requirement]

2 similar comments
@mergify
Copy link
Contributor

mergify bot commented Jul 14, 2022

backport 3.8

🟠 Waiting for conditions to match

  • merged [:pushpin: backport requirement]

@mergify
Copy link
Contributor

mergify bot commented Jul 14, 2022

backport 3.8

🟠 Waiting for conditions to match

  • merged [:pushpin: backport requirement]

@mergify mergify bot merged commit af25861 into master Jul 14, 2022
mergify bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 14, 2022
@gbaz @mergify
bump known ghc versions in cabal library (#8260)
d9898e9 
Co-authored-by: Gershom Bazerman <gershom@arista.com>
Co-authored-by: mergify[bot] <37929162+mergify[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
(cherry picked from commit af25861)
@mergify mergify bot mentioned this pull request Jul 14, 2022
Merged
@mergify
Copy link
Contributor

mergify bot commented Jul 14, 2022

backport 3.8

✅ Backports have been created

mergify bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 14, 2022
@mergify
Merge pull request #8289 from haskell/mergify/bp/3.8/pr-8260
80083b4 
bump known ghc versions in cabal library (backport #8260)
@Mikolaj
Copy link
Member

Mikolaj commented Jul 19, 2022

@gbaz: should we also bump GHC version in

cabal/Cabal/src/Distribution/Simple/Program/GHC.hs

Line 57 in 68d72a9

(earlierVersion (mkVersion [9,3]))
just as in #8169?

@gbaz
Copy link
Collaborator Author

gbaz commented Jul 19, 2022

I think that would make sense, yes. There's not the same sort of failure mode here, so I didn't catch it. (And actually, I wonder if an upper bounds check makes sense there at all tbh, given the structure of the code and how it is used)

@Mikolaj
Copy link
Member

Mikolaj commented Jul 20, 2022

And actually, I wonder if an upper bounds check makes sense there at all tbh, given the structure of the code and how it is used

I don't understand the motivation, either, but I hoped somebody does. :)

If nobody objects, I will kill the upper bounds check instead of updating it, when preparing 3.8.1.0 in a couple of days. In the result, GHC arguments will be normalized in any unknown too new GHC versions in the same way as in the last known GHC version, instead of not being normalized at all.

@Mikolaj Mikolaj mentioned this pull request Jul 22, 2022
Merged
2 tasks
@Mikolaj
Copy link
Member

Mikolaj commented Jul 22, 2022

Nobody objected, so this is what I did in #8310.

@Mikolaj Mikolaj mentioned this pull request Jan 12, 2023
Merged
@andreabedini andreabedini deleted the gb/bump-ghc-known-versions-to-9.4 branch December 14, 2023 08:15
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@andreasabel andreasabel andreasabel left review comments

@emilypi emilypi emilypi approved these changes

@ffaf1 ffaf1 ffaf1 approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
squash+merge me Tell Mergify Bot to squash-merge
Projects
None yet
Milestone
Considered for 3.8
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

CI GHC 9.4-alpha and edit Cabal/src/Distribution/Simple/GHC.hs to accept GHC 9.4
5 participants
@gbaz @Mikolaj @andreasabel @emilypi @ffaf1