Browse thread
Sorted list
[
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: | 2007-08-05 (13:22) |
From: | Richard Jones <rich@a...> |
Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] Sorted list |
On Sun, Aug 05, 2007 at 10:31:48PM +1000, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote: > The main problem is that it requires that the first step of the build > process for the modified source code to be the application of a patch. > For more extensive modifications the patch can easily grow to an > unweildy size. rpmbuild -bp ... > There is also the problem of supplying revision control access to the > modified source code. Providing public revsion control would, I think, > be considered distribution, but meeting the patches requirement for > code in RC would be a PITA. It depends what would be considered as distribution, but revision control systems like git essentially operate on pristine sources + patches, and you could easily set it up so that one branch was the pristine source and another branch contained your changesets (branches are virtually free in git). Again, I'm not suggesting that we fork OCaml. Rich. -- Richard Jones Red Hat