Make it build with gch 8.8 and add ghc 8.8 travis build

[erikd]

---

Edit (@moodmosaic): Resolves #317

[newhoggy]

Please add minbounds on checkers because earlier versions don't build on ghc-8.8

[erikd]

@newhoggy Sure, what should the minbound be?

[newhoggy]

checkers-0.5.2 please. It's the latest version. checkers-0.5.1 was the first version to build on ghc-8.8 but it broke ghc-7.10 I think.

[erikd]

But @newhoggy , hedgehog doesn't depend on checkers.

[newhoggy]

Probably not in hedgehog proper, but this line.

$ grep checkers */*.cabal
hedgehog-test-laws/hedgehog-test-laws.cabal:    , checkers                        >= 0.5        && < 0.6

[erikd]

Ah ok, fixed!

[newhoggy]

Thanks!

[newhoggy]

👍

[newhoggy]

Any chance we can merge the ghc-8.8 fix at cut a release?

[moodmosaic]

@newhoggy

checkers-0.5.2 please. It's the latest version. checkers-0.5.1 was the first version to build on ghc-8.8 but it broke ghc-7.10 I think.

Good catch 👍 Indeed: haskell-checkers/checkers#38 (comment)

[moodmosaic]

🚀

[gwils]

I've made metadata revisions for several versions of checkers. You can set the lower bound back to where it was now if you wish, and the bad version will be avoided automatically.

[newhoggy]

How did you edit the metadata to avoid solving the bad case?

[gwils]

I revised checkers 0.5.1 to have a base lower bound of >=4.9, so it will no longer try to build on GHC 7.10

…

On Fri., 13 Sep. 2019, 17:36 John Ky, ***@***.***> wrote: How did you edit the metadata to avoid solving the bad case? — You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#319?email_source=notifications&email_token=AB54UMGJBV53JW4J3ZXNSS3QJM7IXA5CNFSM4IUORA3KYY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOD6UHIPY#issuecomment-531133503>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AB54UMCV3KTBK3W4TGR7YO3QJM7IXANCNFSM4IUORA3A> .

[erikd]

@newhoggy George used his super powers as a Hackage Trustee to fix it by editing the package metadata on Hackage!

[moodmosaic]

@newhoggy, if you can put checkers back then fine, otherwise I think it's OK to leave it as-is since it's only used in hedgehog-test-laws/hedgehog-test-laws.cabal. @gwils @jacobstanley

[newhoggy]

@erikd I think you need to do it since it's your PR

[erikd]

I deleted my comment :). Version 1.0.1 has been released.

[moodmosaic]

I deleted my comment :). Version 1.0.1 has been released.

@erikd, yes. So when a release PR like #324 is merged, it means there's a new version on Hackage plus an annotated tag for it here on GitHub.

[erikd]

Yeah, I did not see that PR until just now :).