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 mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.83]) by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 67CBE7EF10 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2015 04:12:22 +0100 (CET) Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of andrew.herron@gmail.com) identity=pra; client-ip=209.85.220.179; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="andrew.herron@gmail.com"; x-sender="andrew.herron@gmail.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: Pass (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: domain of andrew.herron@gmail.com designates 209.85.220.179 as permitted sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=209.85.220.179; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="andrew.herron@gmail.com"; x-sender="andrew.herron@gmail.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1" Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of postmaster@mail-vc0-f179.google.com) identity=helo; client-ip=209.85.220.179; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="andrew.herron@gmail.com"; x-sender="postmaster@mail-vc0-f179.google.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0B8AQAdPe1Um7PcVdFbg1haBIMErUUGklCFdIEiB0MBAQEBAQEQAQEBAQEGCwsJFC6EEAEBAwESER0BOAEDDAEFBQQHNwICIQESAQUBHAYTCBqHeAEDCQgNp2qHND4xiy6EYo43Fg0nDYUxCwEBARgBAQQOhXmFDIJEgiaCc4FDBZM7ghcFggOBRo00hD0SI4EVW4F5gU4sMYJDAQEB X-IPAS-Result: A0B8AQAdPe1Um7PcVdFbg1haBIMErUUGklCFdIEiB0MBAQEBAQEQAQEBAQEGCwsJFC6EEAEBAwESER0BOAEDDAEFBQQHNwICIQESAQUBHAYTCBqHeAEDCQgNp2qHND4xiy6EYo43Fg0nDYUxCwEBARgBAQQOhXmFDIJEgiaCc4FDBZM7ghcFggOBRo00hD0SI4EVW4F5gU4sMYJDAQEB X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.09,642,1418079600"; d="scan'208";a="123259856" Received: from mail-vc0-f179.google.com ([209.85.220.179]) by mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 25 Feb 2015 04:12:21 +0100 Received: by mail-vc0-f179.google.com with SMTP id hy4so430611vcb.10 for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2015 19:12:20 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=tLBJedA9YybJ49FWgh+GM7rdHEKGnQXeUOUKF3engTE=; b=CpUaySI5K5kCegi0B+BXeUBBiXfeQ7aFu+C0iR2aa54jLmxz19RN+QXLPQ+G0F5azh 4mSjx6GMcFmpGAdz80BL+L0jJUhbrQARyiAaTr5nhIBuqTTCWz7yWWtF3Ry2tXgqysiT flxTECvnwwK8M4XS6UNTaTDf9B0ABYIgxe3LXb4e81vcccIc4ooggSr68v7qTsCD+DPK z+kOr3bkVIBiKP/WKRdzwxN87YX9wG/JJE/Bx0PWQJcWdM+yFDR4pPLPiD5TMLtqh6ZS s+KmNxm4oIXtCjrCGY9I7fFNkUnUL8ho1RbXU49oGpSQEPw06yvSJBuF3AWnJcOVmGuq knnA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.52.138.107 with SMTP id qp11mr1630486vdb.24.1424833940362; Tue, 24 Feb 2015 19:12:20 -0800 (PST) Sender: andrew.herron@gmail.com Received: by 10.52.134.116 with HTTP; Tue, 24 Feb 2015 19:12:20 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 13:12:20 +1000 X-Google-Sender-Auth: A-TmIwmvBcf90y2Cgukx6KoJQZk Message-ID: From: Andrew Herron To: Jordan W Cc: "caml-list@inria.fr" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=bcaec51b9c07e13605050fe10048 Subject: Re: [Caml-list] CommonML: An opinionated build/package/develop workflow on top of CommonJS --bcaec51b9c07e13605050fe10048 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 I've been thinking about this a bit, as a JS developer who is experimenting with OCaml (in my non-existant free time). I don't use the CommonJS flow in my day job although we do have many projects which our internal build/dependency system combines with similar results. On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 6:26 AM, Jordan W wrote: > > I created a proof of concept called CommonML, which lets developers use > their familiar CommonJS workflow with OCaml: > https://github.com/jordwalke/CommonML My initial thoughts were to stick with the OPAM repositories; even if I have to make a local OPAM repo server it seems like leveraging the existing ecosystem is a good idea. My experiments use a dedicated `opam switch` for the project, enforced by the Makefile (which might not scale to multiple projects, but I haven't tried that yet). I can think of one good reason to share OCaml and JS dependencies on the same server though, and that's including a JS library in a js_of_ocaml project. Certainly using a single package.json file to specify both JS and OCaml dependencies is an interesting idea (even if under the hood we eventually find a way to use OPAM for the OCaml projects). Cheers, Andy --bcaec51b9c07e13605050fe10048 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I've been thinking about this a bit, as a JS developer= who is experimenting with OCaml (in my non-existant free time). I don'= t use the CommonJS flow in my day job although we do have many projects whi= ch our internal build/dependency system combines with similar results.
=

On = Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 6:26 AM, Jordan W <jordojw@gmail.com> w= rote:

I created a proof of concept called CommonML, which lets developers use
their familiar CommonJS workflow with OCaml:
https:/= /github.com/jordwalke/CommonML

My initi= al thoughts were to stick with the OPAM repositories; even if I have to mak= e a local OPAM repo server it seems like leveraging the existing ecosystem = is a good idea. My experiments use a dedicated `opam switch` for the projec= t, enforced by the Makefile (which might not scale to multiple projects, bu= t I haven't tried that yet).

I can think of on= e good reason to share OCaml and JS dependencies on the same server though,= and that's including a JS library in a js_of_ocaml project. Certainly = using a single package.json file to specify both JS and OCaml dependencies = is an interesting idea (even if under the hood we eventually find a way to = use OPAM for the OCaml projects).

Cheers,
Andy
--bcaec51b9c07e13605050fe10048--