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 4F0EE81799 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 20:04:43 +0200 (CEST) Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of markus.mottl@gmail.com) identity=pra; client-ip=74.125.82.170; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="markus.mottl@gmail.com"; x-sender="markus.mottl@gmail.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: Pass (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: domain of markus.mottl@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.170 as permitted sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=74.125.82.170; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="markus.mottl@gmail.com"; x-sender="markus.mottl@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-we0-f170.google.com) identity=helo; client-ip=74.125.82.170; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="markus.mottl@gmail.com"; x-sender="postmaster@mail-we0-f170.google.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AnEDAN4W8FFKfVKqjWdsb2JhbABagztQvV4EAYEOCBYOAQEBAQcLCwkSBiSCJAEBBUABFAcdAQMMBgULDS4hAQERAQUBHAYTh30BAw+bVoxPgn+ESgoZJw1kh3QBBQyNCYFQgRgHhAADlXaBaYwng0EWKYRWIA X-IPAS-Result: AnEDAN4W8FFKfVKqjWdsb2JhbABagztQvV4EAYEOCBYOAQEBAQcLCwkSBiSCJAEBBUABFAcdAQMMBgULDS4hAQERAQUBHAYTh30BAw+bVoxPgn+ESgoZJw1kh3QBBQyNCYFQgRgHhAADlXaBaYwng0EWKYRWIA X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.89,736,1367964000"; d="scan'208";a="27199294" Received: from mail-we0-f170.google.com ([74.125.82.170]) by mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 24 Jul 2013 20:04:42 +0200 Received: by mail-we0-f170.google.com with SMTP id w60so2514317wes.15 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 11:04:42 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=kuOLeszSMMgOJPZq/iK7dJLZdA/zcQpPulMoAqnQJic=; b=V/fYHcdeUUEmbnm13C4p39YRr+QOup6fNfdEateBYiOdhahSK3oQPmf0FRkpmyVHM9 7Kzv2ocPmif6pgGGnCIrvizZBzKRMCCqPqstVDl/7goCQhVQf+uNpdg1Ptc+uOlLYLz0 bHR/hChtCRr7MQE7muebi6JBYS4JeDd6KepXu6A1z+paUqDZZVCpBqX85Rtiymsrz9co gIPvGIWvw3OtmgsxAB6YCePteexR+6KxDJVeysNmKSlvrROUBH6JJ2l5EbprJDYrGDcg /AVLMI3rH+wRNq+1kSIaTHhCaxFtrpKDSGH5s5TWQxzkkuxfJbe7zrGEwssLtQfA2uUq iryw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.180.187.235 with SMTP id fv11mr3477963wic.65.1374689082650; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 11:04:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.194.172.169 with HTTP; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 11:04:42 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <7F8931D5-E65D-49EB-B54D-A50716F3EFDD@recoil.org> References: <1374669368.25411.5@samsung> <1B6BB035-9909-4F0C-9DEA-F713B977A467@ocamlpro.com> <7F8931D5-E65D-49EB-B54D-A50716F3EFDD@recoil.org> Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 14:04:42 -0400 Message-ID: From: Markus Mottl To: Anil Madhavapeddy Cc: Thomas Gazagnaire , Gerd Stolpmann , Fabrice Le Fessant , Francois Berenger , Ocaml Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Subject: Re: [Caml-list] GODI is shutting down On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 12:39 PM, Anil Madhavapeddy wrote: > I think that's fair, but the devil is in the details. The core of OASIS > is sound, but is hampered by its need to build on top of ocamlfind > and ocamlbuild, and the ensuing impedance mismatches that follow (e.g. > manually editing _tags files, and trying to debug which tool a failure > happens in is an advanced operation). OPAM packages represent an output > collection of (several optionally built) ocamlfind packages, and > OASIS sits awkwardly in between these two right now, with ocamlbuild > crashing the party and getting drunk in the kitchen. That is indeed an eloquent way of putting it :) Oasis as a means to standardize package specifications seems important to me, but I wish the scope of the associated tools had been less ambitious. The somewhat unsatisfying build system situation certainly didn't help. My hope is that OPAM will eventually act as the central hub that ties all tools together and make them more seamless by enforcing (or at least strongly supporting) some reasonable packaging and build system standards. Regards, Markus -- Markus Mottl http://www.ocaml.info markus.mottl@gmail.com