Re: Perl4caml packaged
On Fri, Feb 27, 2004 at 01:26:06AM +0100, sylvain.le-gall@polytechnique.org wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Thu, Feb 26, 2004 at 04:44:07PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 26, 2004 at 04:20:28PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > > I actually maintain it, and many of my other packages, with tla/Arch. It's
> > > > in my personal repository over at arch.debian.org. Thanks for the
> > > > offer, though.
> > > Well, this means there are some ocaml related packages who are then in a
> > > separate repository than the rest of the ocaml packages. I wonder if
> > > this is a good thing.
> >
> > Yes, it is, or at least is not a bad thing. pkg-ocaml-maint is a
> > repository just for collectively maintained packages or for maintainers
> > that wants someone else to work on those packages.
> >
> > I've many packages on my laptop which are not on pkg-ocaml-maint and
> > that's definitely not a problem. The same applies to John's package IMO.
> >
> > In the past I used to keep those packages also on pkg-ocaml-maint, but
> > this turned out to be a problem due to syncing issues.
Well, this would speak for moving the archive to arch, since it has
distributed repostiory model, but my small interaction with arch showed
me that it really is a pain to use, especially the tagging is very very
non-intuitive and non-documented.
But then, i hear there is also a svn-mirror or something such, which
allows you to make a distributed repository. You could then have a local
copy on your laptop, and sync with the main repository from time to
time.
> Well, i think you know my point of view... I think it is better to have
> a main repository for all debian ocaml packages :
> - if a problem arise in one package, that you need help from another DD,
> it is the best way to share effort ( i have some experienced syncing
> with Mr Edward -- was really easy ).
BTW, could you have a look at numerix. It has two RC bugs, and medwards
seems to have become MIA or something.
> - if you are away, that some of us need to do some special things... it
> is better to have one working version ( for example i am used to
> inject watch file in debian/... I can do it on packages that doesn't
> belong to me, without the need to call every maintainer to say : hey
> it would be a good idea to do this or that ).
> - it permits to hijack some package ( like the thing i will do next week
> : hijacking numerix ).
Ah, ok, you already intent to do so.
> But i don't want to run a flameware, you can do what you want...
>
> I have just one question :
> Which are the packages that are in pkg-ocaml-maint but you don't
> maintain here anymore ? ( just to remove them )
Why, it would be better for Stefano to maintain a local SVN mirror using
the available tools for that. I don't have this problem, as i have no
laptop :)
And please don't remove them, but add a README saying these are
Stefano's packages, and not in sync.
> And optionally :
> What difficulties have you regarding svn ? ( at the beginning i think
> you were a pro pkg-ocaml-maint )
>
> > > Would it be possible for you to setup a tla -> svn mirroring or
> > > something such ?
> >
> > This would be great, but only if John is willing to have someone also
> > working on his packages, otherwise it's completely useless.
> >
> > > Or at least add a directory in the svn repository, and have a README
> > > in there with instructions on how to access your archive ?
> >
> > Why? Users have "apt-get source" and this is enough IMO.
> >
>
> No, i think it is a good idea to have a list of ocaml related package...
> Just to know which ocaml related software are around....
I tend to agree. I removed all my local repositories, and work directly
from the SVN archive for all my packages now, well the ocaml related
ones.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: