- make it compile with lts-20.12

[ldobrek]

No description provided.

[davidsd]

I just ran CI, and there was a failure in the 9.2.6 test:

Error: While constructing the build plan, the following exceptions were encountered:

In the dependencies for distributed-static-0.3.9:
    bytestring-0.11.4.0 from stack configuration does not match >=0.10 && <0.11  (latest matching
                        version is 0.10.12.1)
needed due to distributed-process-tests-0.4.11 -> distributed-static-0.3.9

Some different approaches to resolving this:

  * Set 'allow-newer: true'
    in /__w/distributed-process/distributed-process/stack-root/config.yaml to ignore all version constraints and build anyway.

  * Recommended action: try adding the following to your extra-deps
    in /__w/distributed-process/distributed-process/stack-ghc-9.2.6.yaml:

- bytestring-0.10.12.1@sha256:82dba4c2de4fdd8b419ed28aec2c14cfe4a3f43d1d6e2263ab26962e7398048e,6254

Plan construction failed.

[davidsd]

It looks like the latest version of distributed-static on github allows for newer bytestring (haskell-distributed/distributed-static@696f609), but that change may not be incorporated on stackage.

[ldobrek]

I just ran CI, and there was a failure in the 9.2.6 test:
Thank you

I relaxed the bound but frankly not sure this will fix it as I don't really understand why it builds on my box. I am sorry if it will take a few iterations.

[davidsd]

The tests are still failing. I think the problem is that the version of distributed-static on hackage is not compatible with the latest ByteString which is in lts-20.12. Perhaps you could edit the stack.yaml to point to the latest git commit for distributed-static (03604c7db49fd74a925cba19fe97d5c9f97d8eb4) instead of using the version on hackage.

[Bodigrim]

@davidsd distributed-static should no longer be a problem, it allows bytestring-0.11 now. Could you please rerun CI?

[davidsd]

@Bodigrim Thanks for your hackage revisions to distributed-static and network-transport-inmemory! With them, I managed to get this working with ghc-9.2.7. Thanks, @ldobrek for kicking this off!

[Bodigrim]

@davidsd could we please have a new release of distributed-process? The latest one is woefully obsolete.

[davidsd]

I’m not sure I have permissions to upload to hackage. I’ll try to talk to the longer term maintainers.

[Bodigrim]

Looking at https://hackage.haskell.org/package/distributed-process/maintainers/, you probably don't.

[davidsd]

@facundominguez @hyperthunk I am willing to make a new release for distributed-process and upload it to hackage. But I do not currently have permissions to do so. (I've also never maintained a package on hackage, so I'm not sure whether you want to just hand that responsibility over to me.) How would you like to proceed?

[hyperthunk]

@facundominguez how do we feel about extending maintainer rights? I personally have not had time to commit to the project for some years now and feel it would be good for it to get a new lease of life...

[facundominguez]

@facundominguez how do we feel about extending maintainer rights?

👍 Sounds good to me.

[Bodigrim]

@facundominguez @hyperthunk @davidsd any progress with extending maintainer rights? It would be lovely to have a new release of distributed-process on Hackage.

[facundominguez]

I went ahead and added David to the maintainers of distributed-process in hackage. Thanks @davidsd!

[davidsd]

Thanks @facundominguez! I'm wondering if I could also be added to the maintainer list for the following packages, since they're all interrelated:

https://hackage.haskell.org/package/rank1dynamic
https://hackage.haskell.org/package/distributed-static
https://hackage.haskell.org/package/distributed-process-async
https://hackage.haskell.org/package/network-transport
https://hackage.haskell.org/package/network-transport-tcp
https://hackage.haskell.org/package/network-transport-tests

Also, would you be willing to add @joelmccracken as well? He recently helped update the CI infrastructure for some of these packages, and I'd appreciate having his help with maintenance.

[facundominguez]

I'm wondering if I could also be added to the maintainer list for the following packages

Done.

Also, would you be willing to add @joelmccracken as well?

I'll leave this to you, as you should be able to edit the list of maintainers now.

[Bodigrim]

@davidsd any chance to make a Hackage release of distributed-process please?

[joelmccracken]

Hi! I recently found out that I was indeed given permission to publish new distributed-process versions. I will see about doing it this week. I have never actually released a package on hackage, so this is new to me, so I'll be going slowly so that I don't mess it up. (specifically, I want to try publishing a prerelase package)

…

On Tue, Oct 31, 2023 at 6:00 PM ˌbodʲɪˈɡrʲim ***@***.***> wrote: @davidsd <https://github.com/davidsd> any chance to make a Hackage release of distributed-process please? — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#368 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAACVOBIOY27NWXZ5EEZBLDYCFYIJAVCNFSM6AAAAAAVOJMRASVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMYTOOBYGA4TMNJYGM> . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>