Re: ocaml-bdb

[Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr>]

On Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 10:15:46AM -0800, Michael K. Edwards wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> On Monday 08 March 2004 06:16 am, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 02:34:59PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> [snip]
> > > But please in the future ask here before publishing somewhere packages
> > > with Maintainer: field set to "Debian OCaml maintainers ...". Of course
> > > you're free to do it, but it can lead to confusion, as the first mail of
> > > this thread proves.
> 
> But of course.  That package was in no way published; Evan must be pretty good 
> with Google.  ;)
> 
> > Also, i would greatly appreciate that a prerequisite of such packages
> > would be to be in the subversion repo on alioth, since it would be
> > somewhat unfriendly to us to make us responsible of the bug that may be
> > in the package (as the Maintainer field claims) without the source of
> > the package being accessible in the canonic way for such packages.
> 
> But of course.  The only reason it has not been placed in the subversion 
> repository is that I was unable to verify the upstream tarball at the time 
> (because of the savannah compromise and downtime on yminsky's server).  I 
> will try to get to this in the next day or two.  For that matter, since news 
> of its existence has leaked, you are welcome to put it there yourself.  ;)
> 
> Seriously though, I would like advice on the package name before it is checked 
> in.  Given that there seem to be at least two OCaml Bdb bindings, am I doing 
> the right thing with ocaml-bdb-ym (source) and libbdb-ym-ocaml{,-dev} 
> (binary)?

What is the -ym about ? I don't really like the multiple gratuitous
-suffix parts.

BTW, will you look at the numerix RC bugs ? 

Friendly,

Sven Luther