[Chore] Build with LTS-21.0, prepare a release

[Martoon-00]

We want to make universum work with the recent LTS-21.0, that would at least be helpful for Morley project.

So make CI test against the most recent GHC version, do the necessary changes. The prepare the next release.

Description

Related to #288

Related issues(s)

Fixed #

✓ Checklist for your Pull Request

Ideally a PR has all of the checkmarks set.

If something in this list is irrelevant to your PR, you should still set this checkmark indicating that you are sure it is dealt with (be that by irrelevance).

• [x] I made sure my PR addresses a single concern, or multiple concerns which are inextricably linked. Otherwise I should open multiple PR's.
• [x] If I added/removed/deprecated functions/re-exports, I checked whether these changes impact the .hlint.yaml rules and updated them if needed.

Related changes (conditional)

• Tests

  • [x] If I added new functionality, I added tests covering it.
  • [x] If I fixed a bug, I added a regression test to prevent the bug from silently reappearing again.

• Documentation

  I checked whether I should update the docs and did so if necessary:

  • [x] README
  • [x] Haddock

• Record your changes

  • [x] I added an entry to the changelog if my changes are visible to the users and
  • [x] provided a migration guide for breaking changes if possible

Stylistic guide (mandatory)

• [x] My commit history is clean (only contains changes relating to my issue/pull request and no reverted-my-earlier-commit changes) and commit messages start with identifiers of related issues in square brackets.

  Example: [#42] Short commit description

  If necessary both of these can be achieved even after the commits have been made/pushed using rebase and squash.

✓ Release Checklist

• [x] I updated the version number in universum.cabal.
• [x] I updated the changelog and moved everything under the "Unreleased" section to a new section for this release version.
• [x] If any definitions (functions, type classes, instances, etc) were added, I added @since haddock annotations.
• [x] (After merging) I created a new entry in the releases page, with a summary of all user-facing changes.
  • I made sure a tag was created using the format vX.Y.Z

[lierdakil]

Uh. You forgot to bump stack's ghc version in ci.yml. Also might as well bump stack version while at it.

[lierdakil]

WTH, Windows build dies horribly while trying to link tests on 9.4.5.

[Martoon-00]

WTH, Windows build dies horribly while trying to link tests on 9.4.5.

Do you think Morley can wait for this to me properly resolved by devops, or we better try to invent a workaround, e.g. ignore Windows support?

[lierdakil]

properly resolved by devops

Frankly, I'm not entirely convinced there's something "to be properly resolved" here, I've since seen GHC 9.4.5 segfaulting on Windows when trying to build stuff, too, so probably it's just that :shrug: Sigh. I can take a closer look though, if you want. The first thing I'd suggest trying is building with -fasm instead of -fllvm.

Do you think Morley can wait

Honestly, I just want to get the update over with, so I can play around with the cool stuff like Char kind and OverloadedRecordDot. FWIW, this here's not the only blocker for Morley.

But arguably we want to push out the release sooner rather than later, if for no other reason than Universum not being on Stackage means Hoogle doesn't index it and that's annoying :unamused:

[Martoon-00]

I can take a closer look though, if you want.

Can I offload this to you to try then?

Or I could go with your guesses, but it would definitely take more time.

[lierdakil]

Can I offload this to you to try then?

Sure

[lierdakil]

Oh well, apparently it was just cabal 3.6 not playing ball with newer ghc.

[Martoon-00]

Just in case: @gromakovsky would you like to check this once again, or I can merge?

[lierdakil]

ping @gromakovsky @Martoon-00 can we get this over with? :sweat_smile:

[gromakovsky]

Oh, let me look now 👀

[gromakovsky]

Solution: bump the version from 1.8.1.2 to 1.8.2, since we started exporting ~. Whether is this a breaking change or not - is arguable, but let's play it safe.

What do you mean by "safe"? AFAIK when you increase c in a.b.c, it means that changes are non-breaking. My interpretation of "safe" is "let's mark it as breaking, because marking non-breaking as breaking is safer than marking something breaking as non-breaking". FTR I think it's not a breaking change, so I don't mind setting 1.8.2.

[lierdakil]

when you increase c in a.b.c, it means that changes are non-breaking

Hackage PVP is rather specific in what it calls "breaking changes":

If any entity was removed,

nope

or the types of any entities or the definitions of datatypes or classes were changed,

also no

or orphan instances were added or any instances were removed,

not to my knowledge

then the new A.B MUST be greater than the previous A.B.

Although, that all includes dependencies, and that all gets rather vague with instances in base when allowing multiple versions.

[gromakovsky]

So long story short, 1.8.2 should be fine and we don't need 1.9.0 AFAIU.