On Thu, Mar 06, 2003 at 03:12:39PM +0100, Jérôme Marant wrote:
> Stephano, if you read me, please try to convince Sven that it
> is very ugly and hackish.
Well, in my opinion old "provides" solution was fine (for "ocaml"
package only, not for libraries) but wasn't working with autobuilders.
If a simple "empty" package provided in this way solve the problem it's
ok for me. Ok, it's an hack, but we are hackers :-)
Seriously, for the moment I'm happy with answers on libraries, ocaml
package deps are a bit less important for the moment. Let's focus on
testing transition.
Anyway I can't see real motivations from you against this solution
(assuming that I've understood it correctly cause I haven't yet seen the
ocaml packages pointed by Sven). "It's an hack" isn't a real motivation
for me.
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli - Undergraduate Student of CS @ Uni. Bologna, Italy
zack@{cs.unibo.it,debian.org,bononia.it} - http://www.bononia.it/zack/
" I know you believe you understood what you think I said, but I am not
sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant! " -- G.Romney
Attachment:
pgp30IYlf6BpX.pgp
Description: PGP signature