Re: [Caml-list] Re: [OSR] Ports-like package management system

["Olivier Andrieu" <oandrieu@nerim.net>]

On Jan 30, 2008 5:32 PM, Michael Ekstrand <michael+ocaml@elehack.net> wrote:
> Sylvain Le Gall <sylvain@le-gall.net> writes:
> > Using a simple wget/rsync (you can redevelop it in OCaml) is far
> > more simple than to use a VCS.
>
> Hear, hear.
>
> I think that it's somewhat strange to incorporate the source for all
> packages into one massive VCS, and it looks like that's what's been
> proposed.
>
> Metadata references tarballs.

Having metadata point to the upstream VCS isn't necessarily difficult,
lots of build systems support that.
It can be as simple as using the right URI: http:// ftp:// for
tarballs, svn://, hg:// git://, etc. for a VCS.
The user doesn't need to know how to operate the VCS, the build system
does this for him.

> I don't see a
> whole lot of merit for hooking into upstream VCS for the general case,
> as most users will probably want to use released tarballs of
> everything except the few modules they're working on.

Speaking as the author of a caml binding library that has no published
tarball, I don't see a lot of merit for preventing access to those VCS
either :)
A revision id or tag on a repository is as good as a tarball for
referencing a precise state of some software component.

-- 
  Olivier