Re: ocaml 3.10.0 packages news
On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 08:58:19PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> > I think so. I was going to suggest continuing to have ocaml-nox
> > contain camlp4, for compatibility, but have a smaller ocaml-core
> > without camlp4 that it depends on. But now I see that this name is
> > (unfortunately, IMO) already used for a package that includes a lot of
> > misc. tools. Is it too late to change that? In other cases
>
> I've lost you, which names are you considering here? My proposal is to
> keep "ocaml-nox" (though I've never liked it since it's not clear that
> "nox" means "no SPACE x", but these are details...) and to add an
> additional new package with extra camlp4 stuff (both binaries and
> libraries). An honest proposal would be "ocaml-camlp4-extra".
Your approach is certainly the least disruptive.
I was suggesting (wishing?) that we could use the name "ocaml-core"
for a true OCaml "core", without camlp4, but I don't think it's
feasible now.
--
Eric Cooper e c c @ c m u . e d u
Reply to: