From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.105]) by walapai.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id q2SFcOlX011911 for ; Wed, 28 Mar 2012 17:38:28 +0200 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AtUBAHovc0/RVde2kGdsb2JhbABFgw61VggiAQEBAQkJDQcUBCOCCgEBBBICJAgBGxwBAQMMBgULFhYPCQMCAQIBEREBBQEcBg0BBwEBFweHaJ0lCowWgnGFEj+IdgEFC5EHBJVhhW+IXz2ECw X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.73,662,1325458800"; d="scan'208";a="138113709" Received: from mail-ey0-f182.google.com ([209.85.215.182]) by mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 28 Mar 2012 17:38:28 +0200 Received: by eaaf13 with SMTP id f13so481378eaa.27 for ; Wed, 28 Mar 2012 08:38:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=hW0DqlKi8GJIGYLHAF2fJLiGWYI23aYwLHeuXSogDX8=; b=KEcpRg45M0TcSTqgBCWTycenQmrS4H6rwe3WEHg+2e26KKuT6Za+PfoCx3OYUKC/y2 lARco5FDr3mdm6YvoPIxK/0ln76IzVn+f67Gp5pkTl3HqK1qRbMF0p0Sfiz+elR6AAi4 biCy6PCOUwGm4IwS3tFnWHP1DdTX0wHDPgRHGBP2KVr9iwPpcFj6wGInZU2SHc+dHXhZ O0tvGN8lycGLKfSnSf3xFUO7JYb8ZyzgUsp3FUFTIU4erAbRAgk+fi3z+NpLfmr6Z3Cb GJvHPTay+qFte74wgqIJb5uIji+8V2HTWltVGRnCvKPG6gf+jPnSlOc9wuIuHGl7Zb+T 6OKg== Received: by 10.14.119.197 with SMTP id n45mr4143683eeh.46.1332949106433; Wed, 28 Mar 2012 08:38:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.0.2.15] (sauternes.inria.fr. [128.93.11.91]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id m42sm11759140eef.0.2012.03.28.08.38.24 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 28 Mar 2012 08:38:25 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4F733068.7090003@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2012 17:38:16 +0200 From: Jonathan Protzenko User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120312 Thunderbird/11.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Wojciech Meyer CC: caml-list@inria.fr References: <4F730303.8000802@gmail.com> <4F732BFE.104@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Caml-list] New version of the binary installer for Windows Hey, > How about bundling the installer with cygwin or msys? Beware of the > license issues however. Well that's the usual debate : should the installer provide an entire environment (e.g. msys + the right compilers), so that users can fire up an "ocaml shell" and get all the good features (odb, native compilation, etc.)? Or should the installer rather provide the basics only, and let users pick msys or cygwin later on if they wish to do more advanced stuff? With this release, I'm going with the minimalistic approach: the installer provides just enough to do bytecode, and users are free to install whatever environment they like if they wish to do native compilation. The rationale is as follows: if the user is an advanced user, they probably have developer tools set up already, so I don't see much point in providing them with another standalone environment that would potentially conflict with theirs. If a user wants to do advanced stuff (besides playing with the toplevel and bytecode compilation in emacs), they can simply install cygwin + the mingw-w64 compilers, and they're good to go. It really is a few clicks to perform, and I'm not sure I can have the installer do that for them. I'm open to more arguments, though. There still is the option of prompting the user about whether they want to install msys + mingw-w64 during the install phase (I'm saying msys here because it's more lightweight than cygwin, and easier to unzip as a whole). The installer could then download the latest release, and unzip it alongside the OCaml binaries, so that everything comes bundled together. That may be an interesting solution, but bug 5465 is a showstopper, and of course it's much more work :) Cheers, jonathan > > Cheers, > > Wojciech