From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id VAA15619; Mon, 24 Feb 2003 21:54:00 +0100 (MET) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id VAA15890 for ; Mon, 24 Feb 2003 21:53:59 +0100 (MET) Received: from epexch01.qlogic.org ([63.170.40.3]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id h1OKrvT12461 for ; Mon, 24 Feb 2003 21:53:58 +0100 (MET) Received: from epmailtmp.qlogic.org ([10.20.33.254]) by epexch01.qlogic.org with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Mon, 24 Feb 2003 14:56:02 -0600 Received: from [10.20.33.146] ([10.20.33.146]) by epmailtmp.qlogic.org with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.4905); Mon, 24 Feb 2003 14:56:02 -0600 Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 15:03:57 -0600 (CST) From: Brian Hurt X-X-Sender: Reply-To: Brian Hurt To: Francois Rouaix cc: Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Alternative proposal: COAN In-Reply-To: <02103BF1-4835-11D7-B97A-000A95773ED2@rouaix.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-OriginalArrivalTime: 24 Feb 2003 20:56:02.0440 (UTC) FILETIME=[23FD8080:01C2DC47] Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk Thinking about it some more, I think I'm comming down opposed to a CPAN-style library. At my previous job we had a large app written in Perl (~5 man-years of development effort) which was dependent upon several CPAN libraries. Installing this application was *ahem* interesting. Part of the trick was just remembering which libraries were needed. Installing a single CPAN module is easy. Installing 30 (and then backtracking to remember which ones you missed) is a chore. Installing a single monolithic block (or a small number of semilithic blocks) is easier. Versioning was also a problem. Hopefully this was more of a language issue than a module issue, but it's a relevent fear. I remember they were having to downgrade the perls that came with newer redhats because several of the libraries hadn't yet been upgraded to the newer version (or, in one memorable case, had been ugraded so that it worked with version X and version X+2, but not version X+1, which was, natch, the version RH shipped with). A monolithic library, under a more central management, would make conformance easier to enforce. Brian ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners