<div dir="ltr"><div>Hi all. I'm prepping for my first GHC commit, so I'm paying attention to all the details.</div><div> </div><div>I'm following the workflow described here</div><div> </div><div> <a href="http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/WorkingConventions/Git#Workflowwithvalidate">http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/WorkingConventions/Git#Workflowwithvalidate</a></div>
<div> </div><div>And I have a couple questions. Ultimately, I'm wondering if I'm doing something wrong or if those commands on that wiki page are either out-of-date or don't list some prerequisites.</div><div>
</div><div>Question #1</div><div> </div><div>When I run</div><div> </div><div> ./sync-all new</div><div> </div><div>The output shows lots of commits from the upstream repositories.</div><div> </div><div> * Is there a sync-all switch to avoid that somehow?</div>
<div> </div><div> * Is ./sync-all push going to push those? That'd be bad.</div><div> </div><div>Question #2</div><div> </div><div>I omit dph from my working tree. Consequently, I think, sync-all in the validate tree chokes on some of the commands from that's wiki page's workflow (eg ./sync-all new). This choking prevents it from executing the command on the repos that come after dph in the list (ie the top-level GHC repo). Adding --no-dph doesn't seem to help here.</div>
<div> </div><div>Are there any known pitfalls here that I may have tripped into? Or perhaps some flags I could add to my command lines?</div><div> </div><div>Else, it seems that adding dph to my working repo is necessary for validation with this suggested workflow.</div>
<div> </div><div>Thank you for your time.</div></div>