From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.83]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CE85BBAF for ; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 16:47:30 +0200 (CEST) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApoEAMHJcUjAXQIn/2dsb2JhbACvNA X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.30,316,1212357600"; d="scan'208";a="12895780" Received: from concorde.inria.fr ([192.93.2.39]) by mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 07 Jul 2008 16:47:20 +0200 Received: from mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.82]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id m67ElEFE011948 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=OK) for ; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 16:47:20 +0200 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AkYCAMHJcUhQW+UCgWdsb2JhbACSXAEBECAEnCI X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.30,316,1212357600"; d="scan'208";a="14844801" Received: from main.gmane.org (HELO ciao.gmane.org) ([80.91.229.2]) by mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/AES256-SHA; 07 Jul 2008 16:47:20 +0200 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1KFrzn-0004TF-AD for caml-list@inria.fr; Mon, 07 Jul 2008 14:47:15 +0000 Received: from ks300734.kimsufi.com ([91.121.65.225]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 07 Jul 2008 14:47:15 +0000 Received: from sylvain by ks300734.kimsufi.com with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 07 Jul 2008 14:47:15 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: caml-list@inria.fr From: Sylvain Le Gall Subject: Re: Ocaml and lablgtk interface committed or not? Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2008 14:47:06 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <48718269.9040204@sun.com> <20080707114122.GA12312@annexia.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ks300734.kimsufi.com User-Agent: slrn/pre0.9.9-102 (Linux) Sender: news X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 48722C72.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; le-gall:01 ocaml:01 lablgtk:01 ocaml:01 lablgtk:01 freezes:01 pxp:01 wrote:01 wrote:01 avoids:01 interfaces:01 interfaces:01 library:03 library:03 debian:04 On 07-07-2008, Richard Jones wrote: > On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 10:41:45AM +0800, bill yan wrote: >> Just a general question, Are Ocaml and lablgtk interfaces committed? I >> mean whether Ocaml and lablgtk interfaces(command and library) always >> backward compatible? Thanks a lot. > > For this reason, Fedora freezes OCaml & lablgtk versions every six > months and avoids upgrading them in old releases. We wouldn't upgrade > them unless there was some absolutely unavoidable security problem or > similar emergency. > This statement applies for all kind of ocaml distribution (debian, godi, freebsd...) and for all ocaml libraries (pxp, ocaml-libivrt...) You should understand that, apart from the fact that lablgtk is written in OCaml, there is no link between lablgtk library and ocaml INRIA distribution. Lablgtk is just a library written in/for OCaml. Regards, Sylvain Le Gall