Re: Perl4caml packaged
Hello,
On Fri, Feb 27, 2004 at 07:22:02AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> 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.
>
Arch seems to be very powerfull indeed... But i think that subversion
just becomes non-alpha and is a really powerfull tool also. I can't make
any choice between this two alternative...
> 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.
>
Yeah.... really good idea. However, you could also create a
XXX/branches/people/YYYY where you keep your own version of your work...
sync when you can and merge with trunk when needed... There is always
solution. I think we are maintaining only debian/ which doesn't handle
more than 15 files, so i think it is not a big deal ( not so many
changes pr day/per week ).
> > 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.
>
Off course, i still keep an eye on this work. By time i understand that
he seems MIA ( there is a svn changelog explaining this when i change watch in numerix ).
> > 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.
>
I think it is dangerous to keep a not synced packages.... But that is my
personnal point of view.
> > 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.
>
Well, since i have sleep i have some more arguments pro central repo for
ocaml :
- maintaining package is more a "transverse" work, ie : when you package
ocaml related work, you still do the same thing ( need to check this
and this and this ) with some variant. So when you change the need for
things A to things B ( ocaml-3.07 to ocaml-3.08 ) you could do it in
one pass if you have a central repo, or you need to wait for a
propagation of information if not. To my mind it is really useful to
have a set of package which need the same knowledge in the same place.
Kind regard
Sylvain LE GALL
Reply to: