On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 04:22:43PM +0200, J?r?me Marant wrote:
> This is overkilling. Apart from this, I think it is confusing because
> users could interpret this as the lib version rather than the ocaml
> version.
Ok, so, considering again the python solution: each library maintainer
decide which ocaml versions he would like to support, hopefully he will
support at least the latest one.
Then, our well known libfoo will produce:
- libfoo-ocaml{,-dev} packages
- libfoo-ocaml-3.07{,-dev} packages
- libfoo-ocaml-3.06{,-dev} packages
- libfoo-ocaml-...{,-dev} packages
Having that libfoo-ocaml{,-dev} package are almost empties and depending
on the version of the library rebuilt with the latest ocaml. In our
example:
libfoo-ocaml will depend on libfoo-ocaml-3.07
libfoo-ocaml-dev will depend on libfoo-ocaml-3.07-dev
Each libfoo-ocaml-<version>{,-dev} package will install stuff in
/usr/lib/ocaml/<version>
Maintainers that don't like/have time/whatever to support more than one
ocaml version can simply provide libfoo-ocaml{,-dev} packages installing
stuff in /usr/lib/ocaml/<latest_ocaml_version> as usual.
The only drawback I see is that when a new ocaml version is released all
the library packages maintained by maintainer supporting more than one
ocaml version have to wait for manually approval by the FTP masters. It
doesn't seem to me a big drawback.
Please note that actually I don't know if I'm willing to maintain
libraries for more than one ocaml version given that I maintain many of
them. But I would like to left this possibility open.
What do you think of this solution?
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -- Master in Computer Science @ 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:
pgpVNX2wb3vhH.pgp
Description: PGP signature