| 14 Oct 2024 |
 maralorn | This way no production code will be harmed. Only trouble will be when people use the old scheme without watching for the feedback. | 23:04:03 |
| maralorn | In theory we could also do something with warnings. | 23:05:53 |
| maralorn | Of course, this is not a solution if we will never remove ghc 8.10.7. 😛 | 23:07:12 |
| maralorn | In reply to @sternenseemann:systemli.org
honestly the only realistic scenario for a collision has been introduced by our own maralorn since the ghc{MAJOR}{MINOR} could feasibly collide with ghc{MAJOR}{MINOR}{PATCH} as soon as MINOR reaches the double digits I still believe that change was totally worth it. And I will remind you of this point when we reach ghc 81.0.7 😛 | 23:08:05 |
| maralorn | sterni: Will you were bumping ghcHEAD why only bump it by 13 days if you could bump it by 6 months? | 23:34:33 |
| maralorn | https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/346720/files/46ee759dd57d2bc8b010778d1e735ab334057b0c..c91c22341c8d025d02d03ab0c1aff268d4fc6ab9 | 23:35:11 |
 sterni | https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/346720/commits/c91c22341c8d025d02d03ab0c1aff268d4fc6ab9 | 23:36:52 |
| maralorn | Uff. | 23:39:17 |
| maralorn | So we basically will drop ghcHead soonish? | 23:39:28 |
| maralorn | Or this is only a temporary constraint and we can bump it again when we get a newer Cabal release? | 23:40:02 |
| maralorn | btw. just watching the Haskell talks from ICFP and it’s kinda weird to see so many people mentioning in passing that they rely on Nix for some crazy stuff without ever having any interactions with them. | 23:41:34 |
| maralorn | btw. e.g. very interesting that tweag is doing buck2 stuff to build projects. But it seems kinda focused on building the project under development with buck2 and still installs all dependencies with nix. | 23:42:52 |
| 15 Oct 2024 |
| maralorn | In reply to @maralorn:maralorn.de
I think there is a way to phase them out which won’t actually need a migration by anyone, it will just take a while. what do you think? | 00:09:25 |
|  autrim64 changed their profile picture. | 00:43:38 |
 hellwolf | haskell.packages.ghc910.hlint an't work, yet | 14:44:06 |
| hellwolf | * haskell.packages.ghc910.hlint an't work, yet. or should I sync my local nixpkgs | 14:44:53 |
| hellwolf | * haskell.packages.ghc910.hlint an't work, yet. or should I sync my local nixpkgs? | 14:44:57 |
| maralorn | I remember merging a fix for it, but we don’t seem to have the CI job enabled, yet. | 15:56:32 |
| maralorn | Just the gentle reminder, that unless you use bleeding edge LANGUAGE features, I guess, using pkgs.hlint will probably work just fine. | 15:57:37 |
| hellwolf | oh, good to hear, I will merge the next haskell-updates soon.
that unless you use bleeding edge LANGUAGE features
That's exactly what I am doing... I am fearless
| 16:10:26 |
| hellwolf | * oh, good to hear, I will merge the next haskell-updates soon.
that unless you use bleeding edge LANGUAGE features
That's exactly what I am doing... I am fearless for this experimental project...
| 16:10:34 |
| maralorn | In reply to @hellwolf:matrix.org
oh, good to hear, I will merge the next haskell-updates soon.
that unless you use bleeding edge LANGUAGE features
That's exactly what I am doing... I am fearless for this experimental project...
The change I have in mind should be in master. | 16:12:35 |
| hellwolf | okay, my machine is probably two weeks behind. | 16:13:02 |
|  polykernel joined the room. | 18:14:33 |
| sterni | In reply to @maralorn:maralorn.de
Or this is only a temporary constraint and we can bump it again when we get a newer Cabal release? As they write this needs to be resolved before the 9.12 release on upstream’s part. | 20:21:22 |
| 17 Oct 2024 |
|  Mic92 changed their display name from Mic92 to Mic3000. | 06:51:17 |
| Mic92 changed their display name from Mic3000 to Mic3000 🌋. | 06:51:46 |
 fgaz | When building a package with ghcjs, what's the best way to get the .jsexe? By default only the node script gets installed. Right now I'm just rming $out/* and copying dist/build/*/*.jsexe to postInstall. Maybe I missed something from haskell.lib? | 09:12:23 |
| fgaz | * When building a package with ghcjs, what's the best way to get the .jsexe? By default only the node script gets installed. Right now I'm just rming $out/* and copying dist/build/*/*.jsexe to $out in postInstall. Maybe I missed something from haskell.lib? | 09:14:55 |
| fgaz | * When building a package with the js backend, what's the best way to get the .jsexe? By default only the node script gets installed. Right now I'm just rming $out/* and copying dist/build/*/*.jsexe to $out in postInstall. Maybe I missed something from haskell.lib? | 09:16:54 |
