English version
Accueil     Ŕ propos     Téléchargement     Ressources     Contactez-nous    

Ce site est rarement mis ŕ jour. Pour les informations les plus récentes, rendez-vous sur le nouveau site OCaml ŕ l'adresse ocaml.org.

Browse thread
Sorted list
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ 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.


Richard Jones
Red Hat