Re: About this ocaml versioning stuff
On Tue, Jul 15, 2003 at 10:03:39PM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote:
> Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr> writes:
>
> >> We used to discuss this a lot in the past.
> >
> > Sure, but we were discussing in the empty, now there is a working
> > implementation, which we could test, build a few libraries for, get a
> > feeling for it, and then weigth the pros and cons, not just speak in the
> > air about philosophical reasons.
>
> This is not philosophy. I'm waiting for you to explain how to
> handle dependencies and to avoid 2 packages built against
> different ocaml to depend upon each other, and so on.
Ok. It depends on tzo different possible goals. In the easy one, it is
easy :
We only support multiple ocaml versions, not libraries. We build all
packages with the latest official package (the one ocaml wrapps and
provies symlinks to). There is no difference from now, it is
transparent for the user, apart from the ocamlrun issue.
In the more advanced setup, it is more complicated :
We do as above, but on top of that, we build all libraries for each
packages. We also use an advanced naming scheme for libraries,
embedding both its compatibility version (needed by Stefano, but maybe
not all libs) and its ocaml version, to obtain things like
libfoo-<foo_version>-ocaml-<ocaml_version>[-dev].
This second step gives quite ugly names for library, so maybe we could
also provide a virtual package with just the library name (foo) and the
devel name (foo-dev) on the latest library version going with the latest
official ocaml (the one the ocaml package points to).
It implies some work for the library packagers, but not too much. I
don't really know if this is worth it, but it would be the more complete
solution.
> >> There isn't any problem with it. Older versions are ship with
> >> stable Debian releases. Unstable and testing don't count.
> >
> > You have to be able to look at the future, and see when sarge is
> > released and maybe even the version thereafter, and ocaml is 3.10.
>
> AFAIK, we support nothing but stable. We aren't release managers?
Yes, but we will be saddled by the choice we make for the years to come.
> >> This is what I did so far, but I've never been convinced.
> >
> > Yes, i know, but when did you get the feeling that i was going to force
> > this on you ? Or maybe my evil twin is in Paris and has been trying to
> > force you to change your mind ?
>
> Force me? You are free to modify your packages without anyone consents
> AFAIK. You are free to listen or not.
Hey, i was just joking, ...
Anyway, please read again the first mails i sent after i did the suffix
work. I told it was some heavy work, and that i was not entirely sure it
was worth it, and asking for opinions (but opinions after having looked
at what i did do).
Friendly,
Sven Luther
>
> --
> Jérôme Marant
>
> http://marant.org
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ocaml-maint-request@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: