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 B15927FE36 for ; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 10:55:38 +0200 (CEST) IronPort-PHdr: 9a23:Q1kwBxEsIhJogl3AM/taz51GYnF86YWxBRYc798ds5kLTJ75pMqwAkXT6L1XgUPTWs2DsrQf2rKQ6P2rATFIyK3CmUhKSIZLWR4BhJdetC0bK+nBN3fGKuX3ZTcxBsVIWQwt1Xi6NU9IBJS2PAWK8TWM5DIfUi/yKRBybrysXNWD14LsiqvqptX6WEZhvHKFe7R8LRG7/036l/I9ps9cEJs30QbDuXBSeu5blitCLFOXmAvgtI/rpMYwu3cYh/V0/MdFVeD+fr8kZb1eFjUvdW4vt+PxshyWYgyU+XoaGnsRlFJiGQXJ4Qv+WYi55iT9rfV83myEeMfeUr0+HzivufQ4ACT0gTsKYmZquFrcjdZ92fpW Authentication-Results: mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; spf=None smtp.pra=goswin-v-b@web.de; spf=Pass smtp.mailfrom=goswin-v-b@web.de; spf=None smtp.helo=postmaster@mout.web.de Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of goswin-v-b@web.de) identity=pra; client-ip=212.227.17.12; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="goswin-v-b@web.de"; x-sender="goswin-v-b@web.de"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: Pass (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: domain of goswin-v-b@web.de designates 212.227.17.12 as permitted sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=212.227.17.12; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="goswin-v-b@web.de"; x-sender="goswin-v-b@web.de"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1" Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of postmaster@mout.web.de) identity=helo; client-ip=212.227.17.12; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="goswin-v-b@web.de"; x-sender="postmaster@mout.web.de"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0BwAAB/XoNXhgwR49Rctg+IGIF6gmGDNwKBJTgUAQEBAQEBAQERAQEBCAsLCSEvgjIVghUBAQQBIw8BSwsLGAICBSECAg8FKIhJARIIBLAZiWcfhEwxgQGIcIEDhQ2CNSuCLwWZGI5IgXSHVQqFY4ZaiTUegj8RC4FOiisBAQE X-IPAS-Result: A0BwAAB/XoNXhgwR49Rctg+IGIF6gmGDNwKBJTgUAQEBAQEBAQERAQEBCAsLCSEvgjIVghUBAQQBIw8BSwsLGAICBSECAg8FKIhJARIIBLAZiWcfhEwxgQGIcIEDhQ2CNSuCLwWZGI5IgXSHVQqFY4ZaiTUegj8RC4FOiisBAQE X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.28,345,1464645600"; d="scan'208";a="184476103" Received: from mout.web.de ([212.227.17.12]) by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 11 Jul 2016 10:55:37 +0200 Received: from frosties.localnet ([134.3.242.84]) by smtp.web.de (mrweb103) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0McnqH-1bdmll3PCD-00HwjF for ; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 10:55:36 +0200 Received: from mrvn by frosties.localnet with local (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from ) id 1bMX03-0001hw-SN for caml-list@inria.fr; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 10:55:35 +0200 Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 10:55:35 +0200 From: Goswin von Brederlow To: caml-list@inria.fr Message-ID: <20160711085535.GA5328@frosties> References: <5E818FB5-6908-4E29-838E-C6A2836F60CE@inria.fr> <7BDA5C9D56314AE6A0D9E07226862399@erratique.ch> <3004f713-9b54-b221-16c3-f4302abc1a44@lexifi.com> <105BC114A91747C4A583F92DB6AD6BA8@erratique.ch> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <105BC114A91747C4A583F92DB6AD6BA8@erratique.ch> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:vItsZ91BFLU3toUl4qY5IvvDpRrzeoaEBDTFh76nSGycSYuwYh7 qYCRiZduaYLuCDAmK+Gi3aZjYajm6Z6n9Vu5ONXbX+lSrfV231Sy6c3+dhklOr4X3GQEEH6 bYyslpuH0dA7/hg245IvqJDRET0UZITYgSs4TK/yhfKlOd9/kLW/oRWrMBKMRBnZfbyP8rZ 4TPZIKANe3XPIWvHdg3pw== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:HpVuVtKk4WA=:JmBJHGAes+8wp3w7PFvTd0 j3xtLz3aiCQHuKNl1KehNFe5JLJlUzIdbD817nHM4L8obfuCwMtSBU993NaJjzZN4ERjuLYN9 ddaKikeWoW2ix25nkKwGmEAYb2yBZCkNiZ7DwzGOq/EqKs5sCBKFpEXLQ+L6+runZqeXy6wKj DIRN+u/vmx7lzuAjfAvi/zunMIF6GbjR6TrFcmEjjXook82LMFYzZ5fLyQAzipHk+zgXGrDau AN5SoF40wivYQvlRwTXx93a4+ZijTC6ZDg4z7LzBG6dMn9pkRYPtOcnwFsAGolHhXxGtCgLZD YbWYurziSz38/NgWj6NrO9pje10b0DxaClCGqKUO33HWWlTqYPezOkPebMu+6AiXHu/+9otCs f+u9i1ni05y5S8ltvpfFAHEfVGn6cpVhRsfodbSZOpWbcT/7HDlVsXPMDDaYH5m4GU8KiVz8S YtEgb7X6bqbb1Db20VloUudni+lClScoiVM7mBE9VHx0uhPQcOCr2PFxtDtrvlCCZPc/hRemh bXfUNKMLzoYdI+O/xlf7ZDZRI/aLSSECgA1D1O0AVqjLctsU5EUqUOc7eBLFy73AJyHfHQDI7 5RIKEN0vjb0qdI15Ei9iV9g3VHfaweC0l8WeOEI4UD4IBWlHNOxwYSoEncBp78F+PQ0JEz27n 6WWsgvWiiAPoIVFA8xphpFTbYymhJBlO3MerQA46RhmUZfalzYqz3UDsTRKRIb1dXdaSJUL9/ alEqRHXUr0YEL0wFKsuPCBtNBGLdJbwhG1xnfSIlRZnHNRaG20PAs0J0mR8= Subject: Re: [Caml-list] About contributions to the Standard Library On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 03:37:27PM +0100, Daniel Bünzli wrote: > [snip] > > Ok generally agreed that the proposal doesn't feel like a good idea. > > > Some industrial (or big academic) users being stuck with older > > versions of OCaml (but many aren't) for good or bad reasons, but the > > same ones are not likely to require the latest versions of third-party > > libraries anyway, so this should not even be an incentive for library > > authors to maintain such compatibility. When people can't be bothered or aren't allowed to update the ocaml compiler what makes you think there would be any difference with updating stdlib? I think the time is better spend of releasing ocaml more frequently than making more work by splitting compiler and stdlib. > Well bug fixes… You can start branching for these users but it is a maintenance burden. > > > Could you share the reasons for you to target 4.01 (and not, say 3.04) > > today? > > Note, if it were only me I'd only target the smallest version that has everything that I used in the implementation of the package… > > However I have in the past published some libraries using 4.02 only features and I was asked if this could be backported to 4.01 (since it was only changing an open variant into a universal type, I did). In general I now choose 4.01 because: > > 1) I think that supporting at least the current major OCaml release and the previous one is reasonable both for me and users of my software. (Well 4.03 is out now but adoption seems to have been slow… Also if the pace of major releases accelerates this rule of thumb may have to change). > > 2) 4.01 has GADTs, fixes for them and a few convenient combinators added to pervasives. It seems a reasonable version to code in. > > 3) IIUC it is what is distributed by current debian stable. > > Note that I'm not sure whether 3) is relevant or not. In my opinion system package managers should be used to install applications written in OCaml. If you want to develop in OCaml you should install OPAM and the OCaml version you end up using is no longer really relevant. > > Best, > > Daniel 3) is a big reason for me. Or if not stable then at least testing. There is also Ubuntu and others with long term releases where versions can remain lower than would be good. But then again there is opam. If you can't update the system but need newer ocaml it's easy enough to build it locally. Half the time you need opam just because the distribution doesn't even have everything you use packaged. MfG Goswin