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 43C9E7F72C for ; Tue, 16 Aug 2016 14:54:56 +0200 (CEST) IronPort-PHdr: 9a23:wpUEWx9cThlR5P9uRHKM819IXTAuvvDOBiVQ1KB80O8cTK2v8tzYMVDF4r011RmSDNydsq0P17ue8/i5HzdRudDZ6DFKWacPfidNsd8RkQ0kDZzNImzAB9muURYHGt9fXkRu5XCxPBsdMs//Y1rPvi/6tmZKSV3BPAZ4bt74BpTVx5zukbvjotuKPE4U1XL9Oeo0d0Tu612J94E/ushLEu4J0BzHo39FKax95FhDAhatpSv6/dq655V58i5d6LoL/s9EVrjmLexjFeQLRBxvCW0+5dXquB/fVkPPoyJECiRF2iZPViTM6RD3WN/dtS/7uedvkH2WNMj3QLZyVTOm7qhmWjfpjj0GPng36jeTwsd5iaYTvQmsvQc3l4XdZYXQMPtlYovce8kbTCxPRJACeTZGB9aQZpUOA6IoOeJDqJHl7w8CtxL7AwSzH8vqxyNBnWP/1q582OMkR1KVlDc8Fs4D5SyH5O7+M70fBKXslPHF Authentication-Results: mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; spf=None smtp.pra=dra-news@metastack.com; spf=Pass smtp.mailfrom=dra-news@metastack.com; spf=None smtp.helo=postmaster@outmail149082.authsmtp.co.uk Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of dra-news@metastack.com) identity=pra; client-ip=62.13.149.82; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="dra-news@metastack.com"; x-sender="dra-news@metastack.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: Pass (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: domain of dra-news@metastack.com designates 62.13.149.82 as permitted sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=62.13.149.82; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="dra-news@metastack.com"; x-sender="dra-news@metastack.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@outmail149082.authsmtp.co.uk) identity=helo; client-ip=62.13.149.82; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="dra-news@metastack.com"; x-sender="postmaster@outmail149082.authsmtp.co.uk"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0CYAAAJDLNXh1KVDT5egxiBfwekMwEBBpcChh0CgVQ8EAIBAQEBAQEBARIBAQEKCwkJGS+CMgQBEwGCEwEBBAE6RAsCAQgYHhAyJQIEARIIEogPCQMBviMBAQgBAQEBI4VihRWEQoMqgi8FmUGPGQqPO4w4g3g1gjERC4FMboYYfwEBAQ X-IPAS-Result: A0CYAAAJDLNXh1KVDT5egxiBfwekMwEBBpcChh0CgVQ8EAIBAQEBAQEBARIBAQEKCwkJGS+CMgQBEwGCEwEBBAE6RAsCAQgYHhAyJQIEARIIEogPCQMBviMBAQgBAQEBI4VihRWEQoMqgi8FmUGPGQqPO4w4g3g1gjERC4FMboYYfwEBAQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.28,529,1464645600"; d="scan'208";a="232738559" Received: from outmail149082.authsmtp.co.uk ([62.13.149.82]) by mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 16 Aug 2016 14:54:55 +0200 Received: from mail-c232.authsmtp.com (mail-c232.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.232]) by punt20.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id u7GCssY8009453; Tue, 16 Aug 2016 13:54:54 +0100 (BST) Received: from romulus.metastack.com (114.212-105-213.static.virginmediabusiness.co.uk [213.105.212.114]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id u7GCspH4060752 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 16 Aug 2016 13:54:52 +0100 (BST) Received: from remus.metastack.local (remus.metastack.com [172.16.0.1]) by romulus.metastack.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id u7GCsoML020146; Tue, 16 Aug 2016 13:54:50 +0100 Received: from Remus.metastack.local ([fe80::547c:3c42:e1da:eda2]) by Remus.metastack.local ([fe80::547c:3c42:e1da:eda2%10]) with mapi id 14.03.0301.000; Tue, 16 Aug 2016 13:54:50 +0100 From: David Allsopp To: Damien Doligez , caml users Thread-Topic: [Caml-list] OCaml 4.04.0+beta1 Thread-Index: AQHR8kbTrKeWp4GqTkOol2tOX5wfxqBAnhWAgAMxh4CAACX4EIABIxOAgAAC0ICAABPegIAABISAgAAWw7CABjYWgIAAEk+w Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2016 12:54:48 +0000 Message-ID: References: <3F86857B-79DC-4FCE-8727-691C23120C3F@inria.fr> <20160809142412.GA12056@frosties> <1038B4FD-B561-413E-885A-8EAE00AC31FD@inria.fr> <8E48ABE1-F29A-4F24-816A-636F57717335@inria.fr> <2EE300AC-F36A-4140-9886-A44A5554B192@inria.fr> <20160812122517.GB13692@venema.ocamlpro.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [172.16.0.29] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Organization: MetaStack Solutions Ltd. X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.65 on 172.16.0.20 X-Server-Quench: 9fb720d5-63b0-11e6-829e-00151795d556 X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at: http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse X-AuthRoute: OCd1ZAARAlZZVg1f DC4bFwdFRBksPQFF ChxFJgxfNl8UURhQ KkJXbgASJgRCAnhE VHkJW1VSQFxyU2Zx YQ9TIwdcYVRPXwB0 UklLXFNTEBpqBAMA SFsZJWoxN31CeHhw YkNgEHVTWkI0fBAv RUxUQWgbY2QyaH0e URVeagtWeVZXfh9E b1F4XXZZZGABKBgV TUcAFDk0OXBbKT9J d0kqBlsXRQ5XWGZg AUhBFzgzFBRt X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633634383431.1037:706 X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255) X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 213.105.212.114/25 X-AuthVirus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own anti-virus system. Subject: RE: [Caml-list] OCaml 4.04.0+beta1 Damien Doligez wrote: > > On 2016-08-12, at 14:50, David Allsopp wrote: > > > > If such a change were agreed, it would also be possible to alter opam > lint (or at least opam-repository linting, once that's fully a "thing") to > display a lint warning/info that things like ocaml {< "4.05"} probably > mean "ocaml" {< "4.05~~"}. >=20 > So every mention of an OCaml version number in every opam package > description file will have to be suffixed with a ~. And that has to be > done before we change the OCaml numbering scheme. Yes, but as far as OPAM packages are concerned, it sounds as though that's = what we "should" already be doing. It's also something that can be done mec= hanically (cf. the removal of ocamlbuild in 4.03.0). > And I still don't know what's the upside, except for "that's how Debian > does it"... It would mean that OPAM would be automatically clear that the release versi= on (4.05.0) is superior to the release candidate (4.05.0~rc1) - that's phil= osophically nice, if nothing else. That said, I don't think there's any tec= hnical reason why the OPAM package version has to match the OCaml version e= xactly; it'd just be mildly confusing. David