Skip to content

Sequencing PRs to be merged #793

Open
@myitcv

Description

@myitcv

Hi @shurcooL @hajimehoshi - just wanted to create an issue to discuss the sequencing of the various open PRs we currently have on the slate:

#669 has been discussed with @neelance before and just needs a final look before it can be merged (@shurcooL is aware). As this affects runtime-correctness it's pretty important. Originally reported in #661 and most recently, independently, in #783.

There is no dependency between #787 and any of the other listed PRs so this can be reviewed and merged in parallel to anything else we choose to do.

There is also no dependency between #790 and any of the other listed PRs, so like #787 this can go in at any time, but it would probably make sense to go in after #791 (and #784) given that it again modifies the prelude.

Prelude changes

We need to make a decision on whether we merge #784, #791 and #794 or just the latter. Ultimately I think we want to get all three merged, but they are separated out per @hajimehoshi to be clear what each does; they can therefore be merged in sequence if you prefer.

Would welcome your thoughts.

Thanks

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions