Re: [Caml-list] [ANN] ocurl forked and 0.5.4 released

["Vincent B." <vb@vb.fdn.fr>]

On 31/01/2013 10:21, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Can you tell us why you need to fork ocurl? Why not continue the original
> project?
>
> And if you must fork then please change the name so the two don't get
> confused.
>
> MfG
> 	Goswin

Hi,

This fork started as I (on behalf of the OPAM team) asked for a fork of 
ocurl to include in OPAM since the original ocurl has not been updated 
for a long time, and is not compiling anymore out of the box, at least 
on recent versions of OCaml. Moreover as ygrek said, his version 
accumulates lots of bugfixes meant to be integrated into the official 
branch for a long time already, that could not make it because the 
original author did not answer at all.

The need of a fork arises from what is mentionned before, mostly the 
original author being unreachable and the changes accumulating too much 
to be kept as separate patches.

As for changing the name, I would personally not do it since it is a 
rightful continuation of the ocurl project (and is backward compatible). 
I’m suggesting to wait for the original ocurl author to reappear to see 
if we can finally merge the changes.

Cheers,

Vincent