Re: Draft for the proposed handling of transitions
On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 07:13:07PM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Here is a draft of my proposal for transitions between
> OCaml releases (not the silly counterproposal but what
> I explained further ;-).
>
> Let's assume that OCaml version N is currently in the
> archive. There are both ocaml and ocaml-base in the archive.
> Then, upstream releases OCaml N+1.
>
> 1/ Sven creates a new source package ocaml<N+1>, providing two
> binary packages ocaml<N+1> and ocaml<N+1>-base:
>
> Package: ocaml<N+1>
> Provides: ocaml-<N+1>
>
> Package: ocaml<N+1>-base
> Provides: ocaml-base-<N+1>
Why not name it ocaml-<N+1> and ocaml-base-<N+1>, and forget about the
provides.
> Since it is a new package, it will take some time to enter the
> archive, so Sven puts it somewhere so we can download it.
There is no risk in waiting for them to go into the archive, apart from
a small delay.
> 2/ Everyone recompiles one's packages against ocaml<N+1> and help
> others who don't have to (possible NMU). A comprehensive list
> of OCaml packages to be recompiled will be maintained in order to
> ensure nothing was forgotten.
This essentially includes the stublibs providing libraries.
> 3/ As soon as ocaml<N+1> et al. enter the archive, everyone uploads
> one's packages.
Mmm, this defeats the whole smooth transition scheme.
> 4/ When all packages have been uploaded, Sven releases a new ocaml
> version N+1 as follows:
>
> Package: ocaml
> Provides: ocaml-<N+1>
> Conflicts: ocaml<N+1>
>
> Package: ocaml-base
> Provides: ocaml-base-<N+1>
> Conflicts: ocaml<N+1>-base
>
> 5/ Sven asks for the removal of ocaml<N+1>
>
> Any comment welcome :-)
I don't like it.
My idea is.
When a new release is made, i re-upload the current ocaml as ocaml-<N>,
providing ocaml.
Once this one enters unstable, i upload an ocaml package with the
version bumped ocaml version <N+1>, and we use this to build new
libraries and packages. Old libraries and package work fine with the
previous stuff.
The only way this will work is to haev strong library dependencies.
Maybe the whole scheme is not worth it, anyway, i will move the ocaml
libdir all the same, for the other benefits, and to let this possibility
open in the future. I will do it after ocaml 3.06 enters testing.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: