From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id MAA06474; Sat, 10 Aug 2002 12:18:13 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: (from weis@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id MAA06439 for caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr; Sat, 10 Aug 2002 12:14:10 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id PAA29607 for ; Fri, 9 Aug 2002 15:22:07 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from mel-rto6.wanadoo.fr (smtp-out-6.wanadoo.fr [193.252.19.25]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id g79DM1r14186; Fri, 9 Aug 2002 15:22:02 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from mel-rta8.wanadoo.fr (193.252.19.79) by mel-rto6.wanadoo.fr (6.5.007) id 3D49FD9700317354; Fri, 9 Aug 2002 15:22:01 +0200 Received: from iliana (80.9.195.62) by mel-rta8.wanadoo.fr (6.5.007) id 3D49FF79002DFAF6; Fri, 9 Aug 2002 15:22:01 +0200 Received: from luther by iliana with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 17d9cp-00009J-00; Fri, 09 Aug 2002 15:16:19 +0200 Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2002 15:16:08 +0200 To: Xavier Leroy Cc: Sven LUTHER , caml-list@inria.fr, debian-ocaml-maint@lists.debian.org Subject: [Caml-list] Re: 3.05 and future 3.06 binary compatibility ? Message-ID: <20020809131608.GA564@iliana> References: <20020729144527.A30919@pauillac.inria.fr> <000f01c2377c$36263060$2097fea9@janxp> <86vg6xlktk.fsf_-_@laurelin.dementia.org> <20020730095833.B6564@pauillac.inria.fr> <20020730083751.GA1041@iliana> <20020730161129.A27941@pauillac.inria.fr> <20020801093701.GA20892@iliana> <20020801140939.A6160@pauillac.inria.fr> <20020808083702.GA734@iliana> <20020809142546.A28467@pauillac.inria.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20020809142546.A28467@pauillac.inria.fr> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i From: Sven LUTHER Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk On Fri, Aug 09, 2002 at 02:25:46PM +0200, Xavier Leroy wrote: > > So, i face a problem, which can be solved by : > > > > o removing the 3.05 ocaml package (and upload it to > > debian/experimental) and keep the 3.04 package in unstable for now > > (note that experimental is not a propper debian distribution, just a > > place to put packages that cannot go into unstable/testing), and wait > > for the 3.06 release. > > > > o bump the .cmi magic numbers [...] > > I would recommend the first approach. The second is (1) more work, > (2) a bit of a hack, and (3) not guaranteed to save you work in the end. Yes, i think most people would prefer this also, but then, the 3.05-1 package is already in unstable, and cannot be removed, thus i will have to either use epochs in version numbers (a thing i will have to keep forever after, which is not nice and not really needed), or release a package versioned something like 3.05_is_really_3.04, which is not really nice also. I think i will probably go with this second solution for now, expecially since ... > > Anyway, it would be nice to know what the timeframe of the 3.06 release > > is going to be > > Well, it was scheduled for this week, but a couple of last-minute bug > report had to be investigated. The current estimate is aug 19-23, > assuming (of course) no more bugs pop up. ... 3.06 will be released RSN. So if all agree, i will release a ocaml 3.05.is_really.3.04-1 package which will go back to the older 3.04-13 package, and keep 3.04 built libraries around, and switch to 3.06 in the begining of september or something such, and we can start rebuilding the libraries. After that, i could even manage two things : o Build regular cvs snapshot packages of ocaml and upload them to experimental. The same could be done for some of the libraries also, particularly at times were the binary compatibility is broken, if i know about it. These could even be built to install in a parallel way to the normal ocaml packages. For this having the debian directory in CVS would be nice, i think. o When the next ocaml release happens, build the packages and put them in experimental, or in another debian temporary staging areas (i have to figure how this works), and upload the whole of it into unstable/testing once we are somewhat sure that the release is really stable. How do you all feel about this ? Friendly, Sven Luther > > - Xavier Leroy ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners