From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,SPF_NEUTRAL autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.105]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B156BC6C for ; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 02:55:08 +0100 (CET) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgAAABRnn0fAXQInh2dsb2JhbACQJQEBAQgKKZdah0o X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,274,1199660400"; d="scan'208";a="21959928" Received: from concorde.inria.fr ([192.93.2.39]) by mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 30 Jan 2008 02:55:08 +0100 Received: from mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.82]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id m0U1t783006753 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=OK) for ; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 02:55:08 +0100 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgAAAABon0fRVYC9k2dsb2JhbACQJQEBAQEHBAQLCBaXW4dN X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,274,1199660400"; d="scan'208";a="7408586" Received: from fk-out-0910.google.com ([209.85.128.189]) by mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 30 Jan 2008 02:55:07 +0100 Received: by fk-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id z22so64006fkz.9 for ; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 17:55:07 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:from:to:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject:date:references:x-mailer:sender; bh=ovssnU85tCKLiB8UF7h3nQS8gDdjrxPgryH8Owd4Auo=; b=VEm8FBw3eJq1nTWM4hSdJAuAjsws39vHb2cVkECRvXhaIQ9IGYUVH38bTCXWOYnZOsMTofl/Gg75RNPl9qvgD0KyhTmdtdg7jfJO/rLIzZZYzo8Ds79VuEfizGQFHfqmU8tSXaXzCgYCgYUOAJEwRiiFjR2rLZ8rJv4kEUovjXk= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:from:to:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject:date:references:x-mailer:sender; b=pcEy12iiQqw4v2b2uPeeoqe5ca2hxX0Y3ChFHlznerxqDfPQrWB9DFQ0XOHrRsEJ0JDGp7InoSPyIfmCB5EgZZCmVf2CltZgHUPK1V6aUyAMUFqjPHf0oTIbpV0e/xoYBSF/uIIAtblqVlSH5QiAfk2e/COmZSEGNsBsOdCNpM4= Received: by 10.78.178.5 with SMTP id a5mr214227huf.10.1201658106844; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 17:55:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?192.168.1.58? ( [85.2.108.254]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id d25sm321060nfh.33.2008.01.29.17.55.06 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 29 Jan 2008 17:55:06 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <74466F71-0B1A-4E72-B395-0D6A4D7B911B@erratique.ch> From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?B=FCnzli_Daniel?= To: caml-list List In-Reply-To: <4b5157c30801291426h1bd00716i52a2573d1b9ef840@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v915) Subject: Re: [Caml-list] [OSR] Ports-like package management system Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 02:55:08 +0100 References: <479F0664.2070706@exalead.com> <891bd3390801290511q29ab5fd4y78ee6d8614461487@mail.gmail.com> <479F63CC.60004@exalead.com> <4b5157c30801291426h1bd00716i52a2573d1b9ef840@mail.gmail.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.915) Sender: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Daniel=20B=FCnzli?= X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 479FD8FB.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; bunzli:01 buenzli:01 caml-list:01 formulation:01 namely:02 daniel:04 daniel:04 proposals:05 clue:06 discussion:06 useless:07 discussions:08 interesting:12 yet:12 tag:13 This discussion is turning into useless vcs advocacy. The funny thing is that we (or at least I) don't have a clue how the system is going to work and yet we are already discussing implementations details, namely choosing a vcs that I don't know for what it will be used for. Convince me first that a vcs is needed and then we can talk about which one. The OP should have make an architectural proposal, but there is no such thing in his message. It is not because there is now a cute [OSR] tag to put on discussions, that they will automatically become interesting. Some quality in the formulation of proposals is needed. Best, Daniel