Re: [Caml-list] Build-/Installation-Tools - not enogh of them?

[Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 13927 bytes --]



On Mon, 26 Nov 2018, Yawar Amin wrote:

> Yes, opam should be easy to install. And in my experience it is; the process
> usually goes as described in http://ocaml.org/docs/install.html#OPAM
> (install with your system package manager). After that you should be a
> couple of commands away from a working compiler.

I guess opam is reasonably easy to install.  The problem is that as far as
I can see there is nothing to explain how to get from installing opam to
having a working compiler.  Or if there is an explanation, it is not
obvious where it is.

> Realistically, today, system ocaml compiler + make is a corner case in OCaml
> development/distribution and shouldn't take precedence over a standardized
> developer workflow with opam.

The problem is how many programming languages exist today.  Is it really
realistic to expect users to learn how to use a different package manager
for all of them?  Opam is fine for people who use OCaml.  It is a
hindrance for people who don't care at all about OCaml.  And if it really
has to be the only way OCaml software can be used, a lot more effort has
to be put into making it friendly for people who are totally ignorant
about it and have no contact with the OCaml community.  Saying "the way to
install ocaml is use opam" and then giving a link showing how to install
opam with one's package manager is not a solution.

julia

>
> Regards,
>
> Yawar
>
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 3:54 PM Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr> wrote:
>
>
>       On Mon, 26 Nov 2018, Yawar Amin wrote:
>
>       > But you still need an OCaml compiler, right? Are you not using
>       opam to get
>       > it? If you are, you already have opam. If you're not ... you
>       will have a
>       > tougher time than you need to :-) opam is the recommended
>       installation
>       > method by the OCaml team: http://ocaml.org/docs/install.html
>
>       Personally, I was in the end forced to install opam.  But I
>       don't want to
>       force my users to install it (to figure out how to get it to
>       work, I had
>       to contact a member of Gallium - and my users don't have that
>       opportunity).  I would prefer that they can just use the ocaml
>       that comes
>       with their system package manager.
>
>       Since opam is the recommended method of installation, couldn't
>       there at
>       least be provided understandable instructions?  That really
>       seems like a
>       tougher time than what is necessary.
>
>       julia
>
>       >
>       > Regards,
>       >
>       > Yawar
>       >
>       > On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 3:34 PM Julia Lawall
>       <julia.lawall@lip6.fr> wrote:
>       >
>       >
>       >       On Mon, 26 Nov 2018, Yawar Amin wrote:
>       >
>       >       > Hi Julia, I agree that we need to simplify the life of
>       the
>       >       user. But that's
>       >       > the developer's job, not the language toolchain. Users
>       should
>       >       not need to
>       >       > know or care about OCaml (ideally), they should
>       download and
>       >       run binary
>       >       > packages or install them through their operating
>       system
>       >       package manager.
>       >       > Since it's not possible for many projects to provide
>       all
>       >       possible system
>       >       > binaries to users, the fallback should be for the user
>       to
>       >       build the package
>       >       > with clear instructions that they'll need to install
>       opam and
>       >       then
>       >       > `opam build` (e.g.).
>       >
>       >       Like the original poster, I would very much prefer
>       something
>       >       based on
>       >       make.
>       >
>       >       julia
>       >
>       >       >
>       >       > Regards,
>       >       >
>       >       > Yawar
>       >       >
>       >       > On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 11:59 AM Julia Lawall
>       >       <julia.lawall@lip6.fr> wrote:
>       >       >
>       >       >
>       >       >       On Mon, 26 Nov 2018, Yawar Amin wrote:
>       >       >
>       >       >       > If anyone would like to chime in and say that
>       OCaml
>       >       build and
>       >       >       packaging
>       >       >       > system is not that complicated, I would
>       recommend
>       >       first
>       >       >       looking
>       >       >       >
>       >     
>        at https://github.com/rizo/awesome-ocaml#package-management
>       >       >       . IMHO we need
>       >       >       > to seriously look at consolidating efforts
>       around OPAM
>       >       for
>       >       >       package
>       >       >       > management, packaging, building, testing and
>       running.
>       >       All the
>       >       >       serious
>       >       >       > language-specific package managers do it, it's
>       a
>       >       proven
>       >       >       strategy and it
>       >       >       > simplifies life for the developer.
>       >       >
>       >       >       I find it odd that simplifying the life of the
>       developer
>       >       is the
>       >       >       highest
>       >       >       priority.  Doesn't one want to simplify the life
>       of the
>       >       user? 
>       >       >       Ideally the
>       >       >       user who has never touched OCaml before in his
>       life?
>       >       >
>       >       >       As a simple example, the web page for installing
>       OCaml
>       >       says that
>       >       >       the
>       >       >       recommended way to install ocaml is to install
>       opam. 
>       >       There is a
>       >       >       link to a
>       >       >       page explaining how to install opam.  How should
>       anyone
>       >       even
>       >       >       have
>       >       >       confidence that they will end up with OCaml
>       after
>       >       following
>       >       >       those
>       >       >       instructions?  Even step 1 of the installation
>       process
>       >       leads the
>       >       >       user to
>       >       >       confusion.
>       >       >
>       >       >       julia
>       >       >
>       >       >       >
>       >       >       > This could be a typical workflow:
>       >       >       >
>       >       >       > cd some-ocaml-proj
>       >       >       > opam install # Switches compiler if necessary
>       and
>       >       installs and
>       >       >       locally
>       >       >       > caches package dependencies
>       >       >       > opam build
>       >       >       > opam run # Automatically builds if necessary
>       >       >       > opam test # Ditto
>       >       >       > opam package # Ditto; --upload option can
>       immediately
>       >       upload
>       >       >       to opam
>       >       >       > opam doc # Builds documentation with
>       ocamldoc or
>       >       whatever
>       >       >       > opam login -u user -p password
>       >       >       >
>       >       >       > Regards,
>       >       >       >
>       >       >       > Yawar
>       >       >       >
>       >       >       > On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 5:15 AM Oliver Bandel
>       >       >       <oliver@first.in-berlin.de>
>       >       >       > wrote:
>       >       >       >       Hello,
>       >       >       >
>       >       >       >       a while ago it looked like there were
>       not enough
>       >       build-
>       >       >       and
>       >       >       >       installation-tools
>       >       >       >       for OCaml. I remember some discussions
>       about
>       >       that.
>       >       >       >
>       >       >       >       Now it seems to me that there are a lot
>       of them.
>       >       >       >       So, developers can pick the one they
>       know about.
>       >       >       >
>       >       >       >       For all these tools there might be good
>       reasons
>       >       to use
>       >       >       them, and
>       >       >       >       those
>       >       >       >       developers who looked at these tools and
>       choose
>       >       them for
>       >       >       their
>       >       >       >       projects, will
>       >       >       >       know them well enough.
>       >       >       >
>       >       >       >       The situation differs, if one wants to
>       package
>       >       the
>       >       >       written
>       >       >       >       software,
>       >       >       >       and one needs to know many of those
>       tools, just
>       >       to
>       >       >       compile the
>       >       >       >       stuff.
>       >       >       >       So, when one just wants to compile and
>       install
>       >       some
>       >       >       software,
>       >       >       >       just for that, it would take much effort
>       to
>       >       learn the
>       >       >       different
>       >       >       >       build-tools.
>       >       >       >
>       >       >       >       So, packaging has become more
>       complicated, even
>       >       though
>       >       >       for the
>       >       >       >       developers
>       >       >       >       these tools may save time.
>       >       >       >
>       >       >       >       It would be nice if people who used one
>       of the
>       >       many new
>       >       >       building
>       >       >       >       tools
>       >       >       >       could provide a Makefile that allows
>       just to
>       >       type
>       >       >       >       "make" and "make install", instead of
>       expecting
>       >       everyone
>       >       >       who
>       >       >       >       wants to compile
>       >       >       >       the software to first learn
>       >       just-another-build-tool.
>       >       >       >
>       >       >       >       Also it would be good, to mention early,
>       which
>       >       >       installation
>       >       >       >       tools (make-dependencies)
>       >       >       >       are in use, and too mention needed
>       packages
>       >       (opam or
>       >       >       others) to
>       >       >       >       just build the stuff.
>       >       >       >
>       >       >       >       Thanks and regards,
>       >       >       >         Oliver Bandel
>       >       >       >
>       >       >       >       --
>       >       >       >       Caml-list mailing list.  Subscription
>       management
>       >       and
>       >       >       archives:
>       >       >       >     
>        https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/arc/caml-list
>       >       >       >       https://inbox.ocaml.org/caml-list
>       >       >       >       Forum: https://discuss.ocaml.org/
>       >       >       >       Bug reports:
>       http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs
>       >       >       >
>       >       >       >
>       >       >       >
>       >       >
>       >       >       --
>       >       >       Caml-list mailing list.  Subscription management
>       and
>       >       archives:
>       >       >       https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/arc/caml-list
>       >       >       https://inbox.ocaml.org/caml-list
>       >       >       Forum: https://discuss.ocaml.org/
>       >       >       Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs
>       >       >
>       >       >
>       >       >
>       >
>       >       --
>       >       Caml-list mailing list.  Subscription management and
>       archives:
>       >       https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/arc/caml-list
>       >       https://inbox.ocaml.org/caml-list
>       >       Forum: https://discuss.ocaml.org/
>       >       Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs
>       >
>       >
>       >
>
>       --
>       Caml-list mailing list.  Subscription management and archives:
>       https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/arc/caml-list
>       https://inbox.ocaml.org/caml-list
>       Forum: https://discuss.ocaml.org/
>       Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs
>
>
>

-- 
Caml-list mailing list.  Subscription management and archives:
https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/arc/caml-list https://inbox.ocaml.org/caml-list
Forum: https://discuss.ocaml.org/
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs