From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Original-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr Received: from mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.82]) by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 549A27EC41 for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2012 16:58:37 +0200 (CEST) Received-SPF: None (mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of kerneis@pps.jussieu.fr) identity=pra; client-ip=213.186.56.95; receiver=mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="gabriel@kerneis.info"; x-sender="kerneis@pps.jussieu.fr"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: Pass (mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: domain of gabriel@kerneis.info designates 213.186.56.95 as permitted sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=213.186.56.95; receiver=mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="gabriel@kerneis.info"; x-sender="gabriel@kerneis.info"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1" Received-SPF: Pass (mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: domain of postmaster@witko.kerneis.info designates 213.186.56.95 as permitted sender) identity=helo; client-ip=213.186.56.95; receiver=mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="gabriel@kerneis.info"; x-sender="postmaster@witko.kerneis.info"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1" X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgkFAKxdhVDVujhf/2dsb2JhbABFhU1HunyBCIIgAQEFIw8BDQEBNwEPCxgCAiYCAhRJiBuoTW6DRQEFjmkGgSCKP4VdMmCVc4VZimGCcA X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.80,630,1344204000"; d="scan'208";a="178368152" Received: from witko.kerneis.info ([213.186.56.95]) by mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/AES256-SHA; 22 Oct 2012 16:58:37 +0200 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kerneis.info; s=witko-rsa1; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date; bh=FBVOLaajyjZHN9C9nd+su6uk0nhkk3CHTQAY29Azsw8=; b=Q3/0BI7zpPd74XGogxX6TjnynYXCkwJn1ae8Aqs219jJ6fovtZAkLTOIuHCI2CTz1Q6tWlLe4djhZ6Y3oaSF6Z/1Qx7olwFArNb8qLC0f+LoJmn5e5IOg8OfpuSfIo10; Received: from 5e099a49.bb.sky.com ([94.9.154.73] helo=localhost) by witko.kerneis.info with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TQJSd-00050W-4v; Mon, 22 Oct 2012 16:58:35 +0200 Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 15:58:28 +0100 From: Gabriel Kerneis To: Jon Ludlam Cc: caml-list@inria.fr Message-ID: <20121022145827.GA10467@kerneis.info> References: <50854D34.4000301@eu.citrix.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <50854D34.4000301@eu.citrix.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 94.9.154.73 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: gabriel@kerneis.info X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on witko.kerneis.info); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Subject: Re: [Caml-list] opam and versions On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 02:42:12PM +0100, Jon Ludlam wrote: > If someone really wants to release a stable version of their thing and it's > dependent upon an upstream project with only a github repo, should the > developer engage the upstream devs and request at least a tag, or should they > make their own tarball/github fork? If you have developed and tested your build with some specific upstream snapshot, but prefer not to embed it, you do not even need a tag: you can depend directly on the relevant upstream commit. If opam does not support this, it should definitely be added since it solves the "unresponsive upstream" issue. Whether it is a good idea to depend on unstable version (and carve this dependency in stone!) is another issue… Best, -- Gabriel