Re: the python way
Stefano Zacchiroli <zack@debian.org> writes:
> 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
...
> What do you think of this solution?
Imagine doing this will cameleon packages, do the math and you get
the answer.
The current Python scheme brings really too many packages and usually
unversioned packages are never used. Furthermore, I doudbt anyone use
older versions of packages.
The big difference in Python is that it is bytecompiled at install-time
and such scheme will be replaced some day with an Emacs-like
registration which will leave a single unversioned package.
Let the maintainer be free to decide what he wants to support and
how.
--
Jérôme Marant
http://marant.org
Reply to: