-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 843
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
New release #5733
Comments
I do not know what triggers a new |
Hey Manny, long time no see! |
There's a plethora of unattended PRs from contributors, e.g.: |
I have reviewed those 4, they all look good to me. Also as per linked issue freebsd/freebsd-ports-haskell#62 above, a new release might also help FreeBSD. |
@nh2 Excellent! Could you ping Manny ? :D |
Any movement on this? |
From my side I think #5609 should be merged and then there should be a release in the near future, so that ghcup can make use of the new GHC installation hooks and pre-install stack by default. |
#5609 is now merged. Personally, I would like to move Stack to GHC 9.0.2 (current LTS) or GHC 9.2.3 (currently nightly)/GHC9.2.4 (released 28 July 2022, |
Yeah, the integration test passes with the workaround we have for MacOS. But it seems it's currently failing now, but I'm hoping that it should be easy to get it resolved.
Agree, but I think it's okay. :-) But there is one more issue that needs to get resolved in the process package: haskell/process#251 - We would need to remove the workaround we have Stack in now once that get's resolved. But I don't think we should hold release of stack for it. |
The fix for haskell/process#250 is now on Hackage, and I hope I've put that through #5763 (waiting on the CI). |
I am flagging this discussion to @snoyberg and @borsboom, in case they are willing and able to assist with a new release of Stack. Thanks to @psibi, Stack has now been moved to GHC 9.2.4. There may be others better placed to release a new version of Stack binaries than me, but I am willing to work through the steps at https://github.com/commercialhaskell/stack/blob/master/doc/maintainers/releases.md. However, I would need some help/guidance for certain steps, as identified below (I am a Windows 11 user, with access to Windows Subsystem for Linux 2. My practical experience of Linux is limited, largely to CI scripts on GitHub). I understand that all of the steps from https://github.com/commercialhaskell/stack/blob/master/doc/maintainers/releases.md#build-linux-static-binary-distribution-with-nix are no longer relevant, given the GitHub workflows in [1] What is 'your GPG key', how do you get a GPG key, and how do you sign your key so that it is 'authorised'?I have no knowledge or experience of GPG (GNU Privacy Guard). This relates to step:
I have also read:
[2] How do you 'activate versions' on https://readthedocs.org/projects/stack/versions/?I think @borsboom may be the only Maintainer of that Read the Docs account (see https://readthedocs.org/projects/stack/). This relates to step:
[3] How do you update the '/stable and /upgrade rewrite rules' at https://raw.githubusercontent.com/commercialhaskell/stack/stable/etc/scripts/get-stack.sh?This relates to step:
The URL in the step above is dud, for me. https://get.haskellstack.org redirects to https://raw.githubusercontent.com/commercialhaskell/stack/stable/etc/scripts/get-stack.sh. I do not know to what part of the script reference is being made. [4] What is 'ArgoCD', and how do you 'sync an application' in it?This relates to step: The URL in the step above is dud, for me. It is not obvious to me what this step is intended to do or if it is still required. I have read:
[5] Are all of the mailing lists [email protected], [email protected], and [email protected] still valid, or have any of them been overtaken/replaced by the Haskell Community?This relates to step:
[6] What is a Docker image, can you create a relevant one on Windows and, if so, how?I have very limited knowledge and no practical experience of Docker. @psibi somehow solved the Docker-related aspects of moving Stack to GHC 9.2.4. This relates to step:
I have also read:
[7] What is required to include builds for ARM64/AArch64 in the release?This relates to this issue: #5709, which calls for ARM64/AArch64 binary versions of Stack. I understand:
|
I am keen for there to be a new binary release of Stack. As there has been no response here to my personal sticking-points above, I am going to propose on the Slack channel that I 'have a go' at making one (even though there is a risk I will not succeed). With the passage of time, I now understand sticking-point [1] (GPG signing). I think I have to email [2] (Read The Docs) versions can be sorted out post-release. I assume 'stable' and 'latest' would 'just work'. [3] (the Unix-like OS installation script) I do not know that the script would need any changes for new version, if the GitHub workflow handles the uploads. [4] (ArgoCD) I suspect this may be out of date. [5] (Announcements) can be sorted out post-release. News would get out, by one channel or another. [6] (Docker images) This is still a black box and (assuming Docker images are important) a sticking-point, as far as me making a release is concerned. [7] I understand the last part of this comment to mean that the AArch64/ARM64 builds of Stack do 'work' as intended. |
[2] yes. https://readthedocs.org/projects/stack/versions/ appears to link to https://docs.haskellstack.org/en/latest/README/ / https://docs.haskellstack.org/en/stable/README/ which are tied to https://github.com/commercialhaskell/stack/tree/stable/doc/README.md and https://github.com/commercialhaskell/stack/blob/stable/doc/README.md respectively (and their siblings and niblings). I suspect someone will have to activate the version per https://docs.readthedocs.io/en/stable/tutorial/#versioning-documentation to get the versioned version to appear prominently [3] How do you update the '/stable and /upgrade rewrite rules' -- I think it's saying that [4] Probably. -- If one could find https://gitlab.com/fpco/operations/kube/fpcomplete-sites-project/-/blob/master/fpcomplete-redirects/get-haskellstack_virtualservice.yaml, it'd make a bit of sense, but I can't find that file. After chasing things a bit, I found https://github.com/fpco/dockerfile-argocd-deploy/blob/master/Dockerfile -- the current release of argocd is https://github.com/argoproj/argo-cd/releases/tag/v2.4.11 -- it seems like asking someone [6] You can do things w/ docker using Rancher Desktop. It will let you build images or run them. [7] As someone who just spent a bit of time w/ stack on m1, yes, stack can work as intended, and would work much better if a new release were to be cut. Please allow me to add an item to the checklist: I'll say hi on Slack... |
Sorry it's taken a while to get back to you... any time not spend doing paid work in the latter half the summer is usually spent trying to squeeze in as much outdoor time as possible before the clouds and rain and darkness return. As a general point, the release process as documented is overly complex, and I've started trying to simplify it for recent releases. I think be possible to move to making releases directly from the
I believe you've already discovered that this isn't necessary since Github Actions takes care of it.
Yes, since those come from the
Yes, usually this only needs to be updated if we change the officially supported bindist versions
I think that's still mostly up to date, but it's internal to fpcomplete. We use that to manage a bit of infrastructure for haskellstack.org. For the moment I can handle updating those. It'd be nice to move this somewhere more public where we could give outside people permissions to update the redirects. Doesn't look like github pages supports HTTP redirects, not sure what the easiest option would be.
It should be relatively straightforward, and can be done after the rest of the release. Docker for Windows should work fine for building the images (it just won't work if you try to use
If you can build an arm64 binary, it'll work. The problem is that we're not building and uploading arm64 bindists as part of the Github Actions release process (which uses etc/scripts/release.hs). I think I mentioned in another ticket that it may well be easier to do away with release.hs and just use simple shell commands in the Github Actions workflow to package up the bindists. |
Indeed GitHub pages does not support redirects. For web content, one could cheat w/ html meta http-equiv tags, but that wouldn't work for binaries. |
@borsboom, many thanks! On Read the Docs, I am On ARM64/AArch64, I've been looking over the long UK weekend at the ARM64 GitHub workflow (see #5847). I had the idea that: (a) I might be able to update it, so it was in line GHC versions etc being used in the other workflows (which I think I have now done in that pull request, subject to the self-hosted runner seeming to me to have run out of disk space); and (b) that it could then be integrated as just another |
I've sent an invite on readthedocs to become a maintainer. |
I have (I hope) followed the instructions accurately and published a first release candidate for Stack 2.9.1. See: https://discourse.haskell.org/t/ann-first-release-candidate-for-stack-2-9-1/5015. |
I have published, but not yet announced, a final release of Stack 2.9.1. The pause on announcement is that the redirect of https://get.haskellstack.org/stable/linux-x86_64.tar.gz (etc) does not appear to be 'automatic'. @borsboom, you mentioned that you might be able to assist with that step. (I've also messaged @snoyberg on Slack about this step.) Finally, I have not done the 'Update Docker images' step. |
@mpilgrem I've updated the redirects, so https://get.haskellstack.org/stable/linux-x86_64.tar.gz now redirects to https://github.com/commercialhaskell/stack/releases/download/v2.9.1/stack-2.9.1-linux-x86_64.tar.gz |
@borsboom, many thanks! I'll move to the announcement. |
I can't build the release: https://gitlab.haskell.org/maerwald/stack/-/jobs/1176868#L1360 It is using the shipped cabal.project. Additionally, I don't understand why GHC 9.2.4 is a requirement to build. That's very uncommon on hackage to require such a new base version. |
We don't (EDIT: currently; this could change) test systematically that the Stack executable can be built with Cabal (the tool) and the release of The executable does not aim to have backwards compatability with older versions of GHC - see https://github.com/commercialhaskell/stack/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#backwards-compatability (EDIT: I see that needs to be updated for the detail of Stack 2.9.1 - I'll do that). The previous constraint on |
So I need to cherry pick 92b9622 Wrt base lower bound: 8.10.7 is still widely used in the community, so setting such an extreme lower bound will break |
@hasufell, Stack's maintainers' guide to releases refers to 'Hackage-only dependency compatibility patch releases' (https://docs.haskellstack.org/en/stable/maintainers/releases/#use-of-a-fourth-component) and they have been used in the past. Would a |
I don't think there is a need for a patch release. Hackage revisions here should be enough. Maybe a 2.9.1 branch where it's applied (not the tag). |
Build failure on alpine for me: https://gitlab.haskell.org/maerwald/stack/-/jobs/1178339#L1482 I have a feeling this will take some time to get into ghcup. |
@hasufell, I'm sorry to hear that. Something has been going on with the |
Returning to the lower bound on |
As Stack 2.9.1 is released, I am going to close this issue and open a new issue for the post-release matters. I find it easier to keep track of discrete things under their own issue headings. |
Hi @mpilgrem.
Any chance we could cut a release before the new nixos release is cut this month?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: