Re: inter libraries dependencies again
On Fri, Jan 24, 2003 at 01:20:11PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 24, 2003 at 12:53:49PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > Mmm, the response to this one is still open, the policy entry is not yet
> > written.
>
> Are you kiddin? see my message on this ML on December 27, 2002, subject
> "ocaml packaging policy 0.5".
Mmm, sorry, ...
It seems i missed a lot of stuff from you at that time, will check ...
> The problem was that some of the autobuilder guys complained that build
> daemons doesn't like virtual build dependencies.
James Troup, no less.
But we have no more info on this, and i think it only affects the arm
autobuilder, i think.
> So my proposal is to restate the above policy using standard ways
> (>=/<<), if this is okay for you I will rewrite the policy chapter.
:(((
If you do that, how can you be sure at what version an incompatibility
will crop in ? Maybe Jerome will lend us his cristal ball ?
Maybe we could solve this by saying, that if library foo is at upstream
version 1.2.5 for example, and that there is an incompatible change,
then we do add a little bit to the upstream version (1.2.5.1 or 1.2.5+1
or whatever) ?
That said, this would not enable us to have a different upstream version
which is not api incompatible. Maybe we should look at the C libraries
version numbering scheme, since our problem is similar to their.
> Remember that I'm talking only about interlibrary dependencies, tha
> ocaml-3.06 virtual package & c. will remain the same.
Yes, but i think we must first finish looking into the problem before we
jump to implement it.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: