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 7AD0C7ED25 for ; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 15:54:34 +0200 (CEST) Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of info@gerd-stolpmann.de) identity=pra; client-ip=212.227.126.187; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="info@gerd-stolpmann.de"; x-sender="info@gerd-stolpmann.de"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of info@gerd-stolpmann.de) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=212.227.126.187; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="info@gerd-stolpmann.de"; x-sender="info@gerd-stolpmann.de"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: Pass (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: domain of postmaster@moutng.kundenserver.de designates 212.227.126.187 as permitted sender) identity=helo; client-ip=212.227.126.187; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="info@gerd-stolpmann.de"; x-sender="postmaster@moutng.kundenserver.de"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1" X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AhEDANbm61HU4367bWdsb2JhbABagztQjE+hPpIigRcWDgsLDAYWAyWCJAEBBAFuBAcFCwUGJSFFEhkJCAGHbAMJCgitLQOIaIllhX4zBxaDaAOOZRiKCY5VhGM X-IPAS-Result: AhEDANbm61HU4367bWdsb2JhbABagztQjE+hPpIigRcWDgsLDAYWAyWCJAEBBAFuBAcFCwUGJSFFEhkJCAGHbAMJCgitLQOIaIllhX4zBxaDaAOOZRiKCY5VhGM X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.89,713,1367964000"; d="scan'208";a="21822242" Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.187]) by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 21 Jul 2013 15:54:33 +0200 Received: from office1.lan.sumadev.de (dslb-094-219-209-147.pools.arcor-ip.net [94.219.209.147]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (node=mreu4) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0Lltn3-1URIML3jn7-00ZdeE; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 15:54:33 +0200 Received: from gps.dynxs.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by office1.lan.sumadev.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CBFFC00CF; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 15:54:32 +0200 (CEST) Received: from 84.107.248.22 (SquirrelMail authenticated user gerd) by gps.dynxs.de with HTTP; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 15:54:32 +0200 Message-ID: <7b4c87b5d9aa76728e239f0a2172b795.squirrel@gps.dynxs.de> In-Reply-To: <383739793.214096184.1374254520546.JavaMail.root@zimbra27-e5.priv.proxad.net> References: <383739793.214096184.1374254520546.JavaMail.root@zimbra27-e5.priv.proxad.net> Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2013 15:54:32 +0200 From: "Gerd Stolpmann" To: r.3@libertysurf.fr Cc: caml-list@inria.fr User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.21 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Importance: Normal Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:OQ9G62cl0VDFHz/rsWMGrBKLk4lelR7ehT3zY6M8rnY Z0AfVnx59h6HFILCmxizE25D5wh6oSvsr2wY8JcoTTlEhQFdpb AOcKwrG0TRo48/PdVTUdwn8UKSS4C7GhULfkoyIAx1n9DGSUGL DXrDiwgYF/9w5b9Y/VjR7cKH/7CBUr9Zvu6TiawrrorIBmF+JS 5E6WS1lxXSpQDXnVwF6WYKx5LsR9h67Kn+pVVyRToIa/IW2bxM sUaP6gix2MVfJVjgdhrow1HYq+FeQrjFqYQuI/XGWKlPnRkgSM 8bOO9rGhXxYyaE/JI2RV7jd0eboQSVbAhlHFV0mDvwzZd45Xag sC8J5u3jraj5kNGTC/B4dmiqijcMaH0+Rk9LUNBgfoetlnRlyB 1U3Pf5r/jwLTtusKs3o+CHH4FuT1v6ekZA= Subject: Re: [Caml-list] opam and godi > Hello, > could someone explain please the relation between godi and opam ? Is it > concurrent ? > Godi has been there for some time, and works quite nicely. So what are > differences ? Hi, both are independent projects. OPAM is a younger project, and I don't really know what the motivation behind it is (in addition to the generic motication to hack something). There were initially claims to make it is easier to package software up, but what I've seen is actually not much different from GODI (actually even worse now that GODI allows it to fully automate package releases). The feature sets are not the same, and some stuff works better in OPAM and some in GODI. As I'm advocating the latter, let me point out some features where I think GODI is better: - It supports binary packages as well as source packages. E.g. a dedicated build host can distribute binary packages to a network. - You can force to install archived versions of packages (i.e. not only "pin" them but build them from scratch). Groups of developers can define the package versions they want to work with. - Automatic search of system libraries without any need to configure these with paths etc. - GODI can upgrade itself to a newer version. - It has a comprehensive user's manual, also explaining things like how to create your own repository. Gerd > Thanks, > William > > > -- > Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management and archives: > https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/arc/caml-list > Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners > Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs --=20 Gerd Stolpmann, Darmstadt, Germany gerd@gerd-stolpmann.de Creator of GODI and camlcity.org. Contact details: http://www.camlcity.org/contact.html Company homepage: http://www.gerd-stolpmann.de *** Searching for new projects! Need consulting for system *** programming in Ocaml? Gerd Stolpmann can help you.