Version franēaise
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    

This site is updated infrequently. For up-to-date information, please visit the new OCaml website at

Browse thread
[Caml-list] Alternative proposal: COAN
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2003-02-28 (12:44)
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 (

To unsubscribe, mail Archives:
Bug reports: FAQ:
Beginner's list: