Browse thread
[Caml-list] Alternative proposal: COAN
[
Home
]
[ Index:
by date
|
by threads
]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
| Date: | -- (:) |
| From: | Jean-Christophe Filliatre <Jean-Christophe.Filliatre@l...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] Alternative proposal: COAN |
> I personally don't think that standardizing the tools to produce > individual package is a useful move. Providing good tools to ease > package construction matters, but enforcing them on developpers is > counter-productive. I strongly agree on this point too. As far as I'm concerned, I (try to) carefully package my libraries and applications so that they compile with "./configure && make" and install with "make install". (Libraries are installed in ocaml standard library place, which is determined automatically by the configure script; presence of a native code compiler is also detected automatically; etc.) OcamlMakefile or findlib are surely great tools, but I can't see why I should use them to contribute to a COAN. I find the concept of a COAN really nice, by the way; I think Jacques' idea of a central repository with meta informations is the right compromise between the current situation (humps) and the heavy solution of a centralized sources repository. -- Jean-Christophe Filliātre (http://www.lri.fr/~filliatr) ------------------- 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