From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.105]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F559BC6C for ; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 11:49:13 +0100 (CET) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AlE4AIzjn0fUnw7XYmdsb2JhbACCNo1nFQoJBRufRg X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,276,1199660400"; d="scan'208";a="21972386" Received: from fhw-relay07.plus.net ([212.159.14.215]) by mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 30 Jan 2008 11:49:13 +0100 Received: from [80.229.56.224] (helo=beast.local) by fhw-relay07.plus.net with esmtp (Exim) id 1JKAVD-00035E-Uz for caml-list@yquem.inria.fr; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 10:49:12 +0000 From: Jon Harrop Organization: Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Re: [OSR] Ports-like package management system Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 10:43:55 +0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.7 References: <479F0664.2070706@exalead.com> <200801300951.47060.jon@ffconsultancy.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200801301043.55944.jon@ffconsultancy.com> X-Plusnet-Relay: 876488471260ecde55e79cddd3561c2c X-Spam: no; 0.00; ocaml:01 wiki:01 wiki:01 ocaml:01 flamewar:01 haskell:01 haskell:01 inria's:01 git:98 frog:98 wrote:01 slides:01 caml-list:01 roots:02 seems:03 On Wednesday 30 January 2008 10:18:14 Sylvain Le Gall wrote: > OCaml in Debian has a lot of problems. I have talked about openly > during the meeting. You can find my slides on the wiki, if you want more > information about it. > http://wiki.cocan.org/events/europe/ocamlmeetingparis2008 Yes. Thanks for the link. > In this case, i was talking about dealing with repository/metadata. > Which is something about package management and not OCaml in Debian. I > just suggest using a ftp repository and putting a VCS field in the > metadata. Sure. I don't see a clear preference for either myself. > >> and don't let people going into endless discussion about Git being > >> faster than Darcs -- but less useful than Hg. > > > > Debian have also failed to resolve this. > > I never participate to flameware. But i have seen many on Debian lists, > and think it is a waste of time. Just like people on this list when they > also go into flameware... Flamewars may be a waste of time but I don't see that as a flamewar. The idea of using software written in Haskell (darcs) because OCaml has none and Haskell is a related language seems nice but several darcs users have said here that it is really broken and unusable. I've never used it myself but I've certainly heard that a lot elsewhere and few people use darcs anyway. Given that many people want to use the vanilla OCaml distribution from INRIA but many other people want to use improved versions, I only ask that future work provide for both. If the distribution is to be source-based with automatic recompilation then this should be quite easy: we have two roots for the distribution, one providing INRIA's raw OCaml and the other providing a dressed up alternative that the community can develop. Would everyone be happy with that? -- Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/?e