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 mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104]) by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0E39C7F75C for ; Wed, 10 Sep 2014 16:17:45 +0200 (CEST) Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of maxence.guesdon@inria.fr) identity=pra; client-ip=193.52.245.253; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="maxence.guesdon@inria.fr"; x-sender="maxence.guesdon@inria.fr"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of maxence.guesdon@inria.fr) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=193.52.245.253; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="maxence.guesdon@inria.fr"; x-sender="maxence.guesdon@inria.fr"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of postmaster@zproxy01.u-bourgogne.fr) identity=helo; client-ip=193.52.245.253; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="maxence.guesdon@inria.fr"; x-sender="postmaster@zproxy01.u-bourgogne.fr"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AtACAABdEFTBNPX9nGdsb2JhbABZhC0KuEmTT4VvAYEQFhABAQEBAQgUCT6EAwEBBAE6RAsLGAklD0gZFAeIHwy+OgEXj1QWhDYFkkKKMJkSaoJPAQEB X-IPAS-Result: AtACAABdEFTBNPX9nGdsb2JhbABZhC0KuEmTT4VvAYEQFhABAQEBAQgUCT6EAwEBBAE6RAsLGAklD0gZFAeIHwy+OgEXj1QWhDYFkkKKMJkSaoJPAQEB X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.04,499,1406584800"; d="scan'208";a="78454159" Received: from zproxy01.u-bourgogne.fr ([193.52.245.253]) by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 10 Sep 2014 16:17:44 +0200 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by zproxy01.u-bourgogne.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8114BB504A; Wed, 10 Sep 2014 16:17:44 +0200 (CEST) Received: from zproxy01.u-bourgogne.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zproxy01.u-bourgogne.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id PvsJ2PwMDNOv; Wed, 10 Sep 2014 16:17:44 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by zproxy01.u-bourgogne.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CDDCB50D5; Wed, 10 Sep 2014 16:17:44 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at zproxy01.u-bourgogne.fr Received: from zproxy01.u-bourgogne.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zproxy01.u-bourgogne.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id YJXzkOJXDUCE; Wed, 10 Sep 2014 16:17:44 +0200 (CEST) Received: from alcazar2 (sunset.u-bourgogne.fr [193.52.245.3]) by zproxy01.u-bourgogne.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4D4DB504A; Wed, 10 Sep 2014 16:17:43 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2014 16:17:44 +0200 From: Maxence Guesdon To: caml-list@inria.fr Message-ID: <20140910161744.5a7eecd0@alcazar2> In-Reply-To: <5410522E.3050207@inria.fr> References: <5410522E.3050207@inria.fr> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.9.3 (GTK+ 2.24.23; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Caml-list] One build system to rule them all? On Wed, 10 Sep 2014 15:29:18 +0200 Francois Berenger wrote: > On 09/10/2014 02:49 PM, Yotam Barnoy wrote: > > It appears to me that every couple of months we hear of someone > > implementing yet another build system in ocaml. Given the success of > > opam, I think it's clear that sometimes a monolithic solution, behind > > which the entire community can organize, is the best solution -- > > especially for infrastructure. Looking at haskell, having cabal as the > > main build system has really helped them advance in terms of supporting > > other platforms (such as windows), and since all community efforts in > > this realm are focused on cabal, they can improve it rapidly. > > > > a. Is there any build system we can organize behind to crown as the > > official build system? > > b. What are the use-cases missing from specific build systems, that have > > driven people to use other build systems? > > c. To pick one possible candidate, if ocamlbuild were spun out of the > > compiler, could it be enhanced to cover all the main use-cases so > > (almost) everyone would be happy with it? > > > > It's just such a shame to see the ocaml community re-inventing the wheel > > over and over again, each time with some limitation so that the next > > person needs to do the same thing yet again. > > It is not a shame, it is a tradition in the ocaml community! :-D > For example, almost each ocaml programmer that I know of have written a > logger (me included, it's even in opam so that I can reinvent another > wheel next time). > > More seriously, concerning build systems, we clearly have quite some > choice on the OCaml shelf: > - obuild > - ocamlbuild > - omake > - oasis (which in fact uses ocamlbuild, don't forget that) > - jenga > - [...] I can't resist to add good old Make to the list, not specific to OCaml, yet powerful enough and known by a lot of developers. Regards, Maxence