Support GHC 9.2

[sjakobi]

No description provided.

[mrkkrp]

Installation of Cabal 3.6 seems to fail.

[sjakobi]

Indeed. Maybe the GHCup version is too old. Purging the cache might help?!

I probably won't debug this further. I can offer reverting the changes to .github/workflows/ci.yaml.

[mrkkrp]

I think 3.6 is simply not available in https://github.com/haskell/actions. Doesn't look to be the case:

https://github.com/haskell/actions/blob/main/setup/src/versions.json#L28

[sjakobi]

How about using haskell-ci for generating a GHA config?! haskell-ci does support GHC 9.2.1 and cabal 3.6.

[mrkkrp]

There seems to be so many different CI scripts now. Is haskell-ci considered better than haskell/actions? Does it support GitHub actions?

[sjakobi]

Is haskell-ci considered better than haskell/actions? Does it support GitHub actions?

I have simply kept using haskell-ci since the Travis days. I haven't really bothered to learn how to configurate GHA myself.

I think it's pretty easy to use even though documentation is rather sparse. Options can be discovered via haskell-ci --help and should be added to cabal.haskell-ci. If you want to add CI with a different GHC version, add it to the tested-with section and run haskell-ci regenerate. Also, you should install haskell-ci from master. Hackage releases are done rather infrequently.

[sjakobi]

The haskell-ci maintainers are very responsive though. That's a plus for me. :)

[sjakobi]

Looks like bytestring's CI setup is going to have better architecture coverage than GHC! 💪

Apologies, wrong PR! 😊

[sjakobi]

Ping @mrkkrp. :)

[mrkkrp]

This is not forgotten. I plan to go over all my packages and update a bunch of things once mtl-2.3 is released. Which should happens tomorrow I guess?

[sjakobi]

Which should happens tomorrow I guess?

Maybe. AFAIK the mtl maintainers need to decide whether the breaking changes included in rc-3 are acceptable first: haskell/mtl#101 (comment)

[mrkkrp]

Closing in favor of #45.