| 23 Oct 2024 |
 sterni | Unfortunately not. The problem is that when nightly is deemed ready and forked into an LTS snapshot, nightly is usually bumped to a new compiler. Then all hell breaks loose because it is only then people realize how broken everything is and a lot of packages get removed and gradually reintroduced when their maintainers manage to catch up. They can sort of afford that because you can just pick a solver that works for you. We, on the other hand, have some kind of quality standard in mind that we have to achieve every haskell-updates merge. | 11:35:22 |
| sterni | so tracking nightly would probably mean occasionally jumping ahead of LTS which is probably very work intensive | 11:35:52 |
| sterni | maralorn: well and some are properly tied to ghc, e.g. base | 11:36:21 |
 emily | right. I was thinking of nightly as "if it hurts, do it more often", but if it's more just like tracking n + 1 instead of n then it seems like a bad deal, given that you pay for that + 1 in "nothing works" currency. | 11:37:32 |
| sterni | Also when we tracked nightly was kind of a special time when aeson 2.0 came out and GHC moved to the 9.* versions. That felt like years of the ecosystem stuck in a strange transition period | 11:37:38 |
 maralorn | I mean I guess at some point in the lifecycle nightly is probably already stable enough for us and at that point we could just jump the gun. And I actually don’t think it would be significantly more work than waiting for it officially becoming LTS. But as I said, we are normally to busy to do that in that moment so we wait until we are forced. | 11:37:43 |
| emily | I don't suppose there's any convenient lining-up with the release cycle where you could e.g. jump to a nightly that will be LTS by the time the Nixpkgs release happens? | 11:38:16 |
| maralorn | Actually it might make sense to do it after the 24.11 release … | 11:39:03 |
| sterni | I think stackage releases when it's “ready” or when they really want to move to a new GHC version on nightly or whatever | 11:39:05 |
| sterni | I mean jumping to nightly may be worth a try. We'd need to gain experience when the /magic moment/ to jump is probably. | 11:39:37 |
| emily | In reply to @maralorn:maralorn.de
Actually it might make sense to do it after the 24.11 release … it's always nicer to eat pain early in release cycle rather than late at least :) | 11:40:02 |
| maralorn | 34 actually, https://downloads.haskell.org/ghc/latest/docs/users_guide/9.10.1-notes.html#included-libraries | 11:40:11 |
| emily | (FWIW I have no objection to tracking LTS or anything. just looking to learn more about the procedures) | 11:40:50 |
| maralorn | In reply to @sternenseemann:systemli.org
I mean jumping to nightly may be worth a try. We'd need to gain experience when the /magic moment/ to jump is probably. Probably need some kind of canary packages. i.e. pandoc, hledger or something needs to be included. | 11:41:13 |
| maralorn | In reply to @emilazy:matrix.org
(FWIW I have no objection to tracking LTS or anything. just looking to learn more about the procedures) Discussion didn’t feel hostile in the slightest. | 11:41:41 |
| emily | just wanted to be clear that I'm not being like hey you should change something 😅 | 11:43:37 |
| emily | In reply to @maralorn:maralorn.de
Probably need some kind of canary packages. i.e. pandoc, hledger or something needs to be included. a "channel blocker job" of sorts for release-haskell.nix, I suppose? | 11:44:05 |
| sterni | what you probably can do is checking the diff (e.g. https://www.stackage.org/diff/lts-22.39/nightly-2024-10-22) and contemplating whether you can afford breaking the packages that have been removed | 11:45:27 |
| maralorn | In reply to @emilazy:matrix.org
just wanted to be clear that I'm not being like hey you should change something 😅 Well it was a nice reminder, that that is actually what we (at least I) want. It’s just that we didn’t get to it. | 11:45:31 |
| sterni | but another question are of course untracked packages that may be broken by upgrades that are fine in stackage | 11:45:50 |
| emily | losing amazonka sounds painful (or does nobody use that any more?) | 11:46:21 |
| maralorn | Huh, at some point I didn’t give a shit about amzonka. I don’t work for jeff bezos … But now we use it at work, so I kinda have to care. /o\ | 11:47:18 |
| emily | oh no, lambdabot too. unshippable. | 11:47:29 |
| maralorn | I mean it doesn’t have to mean that we can’t fix them. We are allowed workarounds which stackage doesn’t. | 11:50:16 |
| emily | the lambdabot part was a joke :) | 11:51:48 |
| emily | amazonka and sdl2 seemed like the only worrying things from a quick scan. | 11:51:59 |
| emily | so maybe after 24.11 would be reasonable. | 11:52:15 |
| maralorn | Well, there is also apparently no ghc-lib-parser and thus no ormolu, hlint, hindent and stuff like that. A bit unclear to me whether that’s normal on nightly. | 11:53:03 |
| emily | oh, I missed that one. | 11:54:37 |
|  dyniec changed their profile picture. | 12:10:51 |
