Version française
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 Discussions place, and requirements
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2008-02-01 (13:27)
From: Pietro Abate <Pietro.Abate@a...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Discussions place, and requirements
On Fri, Feb 01, 2008 at 01:36:09PM +0100, Romain Beauxis wrote:
> Second questions is ocaml modules that we are going to distribute there.
> While we have discussed that different way we could use to collect projects 
> from different places, I don't think we discussed the minimal support that 
> the module should provide when it comes to installing and registering the 
> module.

I think that for the moment it's useless to strive to convert every and
each ocaml developer to use the same build system. As I suggested
before, what we should do is only to agree to an interface and then let
the various distribution to deal with build dependencies. In your
example, if a library don't use ocamlfind, this is ok. The only
important thing is to honor the build interface. 

As a developer (and as a software maintainer) I imagine a world where if
I want to use library x.y I've only to take care to give it the right
tools to build, but with the assurance that if I call 'make install',
the library will end up in the right place. would contain
all these libraries so fetching a new version from the net and
re-compiling it would be a snap.

One day we could hope for a convergence in the building tool department
as well, but I think is far too early to call for this kind of
standardization. For example it would be great if all developers would
integrate the debian patches to their build systems...


++ "All great truths begin as blasphemies." -George Bernard Shaw
++ Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments.