-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 45
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
Compile failure / inaccurate version bounds #46
Comments
Yep, I'm now deciding wether to drop Edit: Ah no, wrong, |
mrkkrp
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Mar 1, 2017
This easier-to-read script uses Cabal for builds. I don't use Cabal, but for CI it may be better because it allows to build in more adverse environment and what builds with Cabal will sure build with Stack and appropriate resolver. I hope this should help catch things like #46 in the future. This also adds a check that we can generate tarball distribution without issues and that Haddock coverage is 100%.
mrkkrp
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Mar 1, 2017
This easier-to-read script uses Cabal for builds. I don't use Cabal, but for CI it may be better because it allows to build in more adverse environment and what builds with Cabal will sure build with Stack and appropriate resolver. I hope this should help catch things like #46 in the future. This also adds a check that we can generate tarball distribution without issues and that Haddock coverage is 100%.
mrkkrp
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Mar 1, 2017
Close #46. Also drop redundant denpendencies for test suites and align Cabal file for consistency (could not resist!).
mrkkrp
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Mar 2, 2017
This easier-to-read script uses Cabal for builds. I don't use Cabal, but for CI it may be better because it allows to build in more adverse environment and what builds with Cabal will sure build with Stack and appropriate resolver. I hope this should help catch things like #46 in the future. This also adds a check that we can generate tarball distribution without issues and that Haddock coverage is 100%.
mrkkrp
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Mar 2, 2017
Close #46. Also drop redundant denpendencies for test suites and align Cabal file for consistency (could not resist!).
mrkkrp
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Mar 2, 2017
Close #46. Also drop redundant denpendencies for test suites and align Cabal file for consistency (could not resist!).
mrkkrp
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Mar 3, 2017
Close #46. Also drop redundant denpendencies for test suites and align Cabal file for consistency (could not resist!).
sjakobi
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Mar 3, 2017
Close #46. Also drop redundant denpendencies for test suites and align Cabal file for consistency (could not resist!).
mrkkrp
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Mar 3, 2017
This easier-to-read script uses Cabal for builds. I don't use Cabal, but for CI it may be better because it allows to build in more adverse environment and what builds with Cabal will sure build with Stack and appropriate resolver. I hope this should help catch things like #46 in the future. This also adds a check that we can generate tarball distribution without issues and that Haddock coverage is 100%.
sjakobi
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Mar 4, 2017
This easier-to-read script uses Cabal for builds. I don't use Cabal, but for CI it may be better because it allows to build in more adverse environment and what builds with Cabal will sure build with Stack and appropriate resolver. I hope this should help catch things like #46 in the future. This also adds a check that we can generate tarball distribution without issues and that Haddock coverage is 100%.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
The release declares
However, GHC 7.8 and GHC 7.6 disagree:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: