But you still need an OCaml compiler, right? Are you not using opam to get it? If you are, you already have opam. If you're not ... you will have a tougher time than you need to :-) opam is the recommended installation method by the OCaml team: http://ocaml.org/docs/install.html Regards, Yawar On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 3:34 PM Julia Lawall wrote: > > > On Mon, 26 Nov 2018, Yawar Amin wrote: > > > Hi Julia, I agree that we need to simplify the life of the user. But > that's > > the developer's job, not the language toolchain. Users should not need to > > know or care about OCaml (ideally), they should download and run binary > > packages or install them through their operating system package manager. > > Since it's not possible for many projects to provide all possible system > > binaries to users, the fallback should be for the user to build the > package > > with clear instructions that they'll need to install opam and then > > `opam build` (e.g.). > > Like the original poster, I would very much prefer something based on > make. > > julia > > > > > Regards, > > > > Yawar > > > > On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 11:59 AM Julia Lawall > wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, 26 Nov 2018, Yawar Amin wrote: > > > > > If anyone would like to chime in and say that OCaml build and > > packaging > > > system is not that complicated, I would recommend first > > looking > > > at https://github.com/rizo/awesome-ocaml#package-management > > . IMHO we need > > > to seriously look at consolidating efforts around OPAM for > > package > > > management, packaging, building, testing and running. All the > > serious > > > language-specific package managers do it, it's a proven > > strategy and it > > > simplifies life for the developer. > > > > I find it odd that simplifying the life of the developer is the > > highest > > priority. Doesn't one want to simplify the life of the user? > > Ideally the > > user who has never touched OCaml before in his life? > > > > As a simple example, the web page for installing OCaml says that > > the > > recommended way to install ocaml is to install opam. There is a > > link to a > > page explaining how to install opam. How should anyone even > > have > > confidence that they will end up with OCaml after following > > those > > instructions? Even step 1 of the installation process leads the > > user to > > confusion. > > > > julia > > > > > > > > This could be a typical workflow: > > > > > > cd some-ocaml-proj > > > opam install # Switches compiler if necessary and installs and > > locally > > > caches package dependencies > > > opam build > > > opam run # Automatically builds if necessary > > > opam test # Ditto > > > opam package # Ditto; --upload option can immediately upload > > to opam > > > opam doc # Builds documentation with ocamldoc or whatever > > > opam login -u user -p password > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Yawar > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 5:15 AM Oliver Bandel > > > > > wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > > > a while ago it looked like there were not enough build- > > and > > > installation-tools > > > for OCaml. I remember some discussions about that. > > > > > > Now it seems to me that there are a lot of them. > > > So, developers can pick the one they know about. > > > > > > For all these tools there might be good reasons to use > > them, and > > > those > > > developers who looked at these tools and choose them for > > their > > > projects, will > > > know them well enough. > > > > > > The situation differs, if one wants to package the > > written > > > software, > > > and one needs to know many of those tools, just to > > compile the > > > stuff. > > > So, when one just wants to compile and install some > > software, > > > just for that, it would take much effort to learn the > > different > > > build-tools. > > > > > > So, packaging has become more complicated, even though > > for the > > > developers > > > these tools may save time. > > > > > > It would be nice if people who used one of the many new > > building > > > tools > > > could provide a Makefile that allows just to type > > > "make" and "make install", instead of expecting everyone > > who > > > wants to compile > > > the software to first learn just-another-build-tool. > > > > > > Also it would be good, to mention early, which > > installation > > > tools (make-dependencies) > > > are in use, and too mention needed packages (opam or > > others) to > > > just build the stuff. > > > > > > Thanks and regards, > > > Oliver Bandel > > > > > > -- > > > Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management and > > archives: > > > https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/arc/caml-list > > > https://inbox.ocaml.org/caml-list > > > Forum: https://discuss.ocaml.org/ > > > Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management and archives: > > https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/arc/caml-list > > https://inbox.ocaml.org/caml-list > > Forum: https://discuss.ocaml.org/ > > Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs > > > > > > > > -- > Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management and archives: > https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/arc/caml-list > https://inbox.ocaml.org/caml-list > Forum: https://discuss.ocaml.org/ > Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs -- Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management and archives: https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/arc/caml-list https://inbox.ocaml.org/caml-list Forum: https://discuss.ocaml.org/ Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs