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

v1.0.9-r4: use major-major upper bounds only #82

Open
wants to merge 7 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

andreasabel
Copy link
Collaborator

Optimistic strategy: assume that nothing breaks if dependencies bump
their major version (unless they bump the major-major version).

Breakage can then be addressed by Hackage revisions.

Optimistic strategy: assume that nothing breaks if dependencies bump
their major version (unless they bump the major-major version).

Breakage can then be addressed by Hackage revisions.
@Bodigrim
Copy link

It would be nice to revise cabal-doctest on Hackage, otherwise plenty of packages are blocked from upgrade to GHC 9.10.

Per the README & haskell/cabal#5170
it is only necessary for Cabal < 2.4 ( 2018 ).
The examples / tests can stay on major-major bounds: this'll help detect issues earlier, on CI.
@ulidtko
Copy link
Owner

ulidtko commented Jun 14, 2024

Hi @andreasabel! I've fixed the CI for GHC 9.10. We're ready for revision 4 here.

(Per #79, repo transfer was done today; I'd appreciate if you let me upload the revision myself, to get practice)

I'm happy with major-major bounds in the examples / tests — but in the main lib, I'm reverting to Cabal < 3.14. This feels more uniform, in-line with previous revisions, and I don't feel confident enough (in Cabal as a dependency) to break the pattern just yet.

@Qqwy
Copy link

Qqwy commented Jun 21, 2024

Looking forward to the new version release!

@Bodigrim
Copy link

@phadej could you possibly add @ulidtko to maintainers? https://hackage.haskell.org/package/cabal-doctest/maintainers/

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.

None yet

4 participants