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
[Caml-list] OCaml development site
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2004-05-07 (11:31)
From: John Goerzen <jgoerzen@c...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] OCaml development site
On Fri, May 07, 2004 at 12:44:19PM +0200, Christophe TROESTLER wrote:
> Before engaging into the work of setting it up, we would like to have
> some feedback from you:

Sounds like a great idea!

> * If such a site existed, would you move your project(s) to it
>   (tarballs, documentation, CVS,...)?

I'd put the releases there if it was easy.  If it took lots of time,
making me go to a website and login somewhere (I don't usually work with
a browser open, and would prefer scriptable command-line tools), I'd
probably not do so as often.  Here's one brainstorm:

Authors could upload a tar.gz and a GPG signature file.  Your software
could compare the tar.gz to the list of authorized authors, and then
place both in whatever download area (so the sig serves as both
authentication for uploads and a verification method for end users).

There could be a standard for naming documentation within a tarball.
For instance, if everyone uses docs/html, then you could just pull out
the latest docs after each upload.

I would not store CVS there since I use Arch.  I personally wouldn't
store Arch stuff there either; I already have my own repositories.

> * Are you interested that such a site provides some documentation to
>   help you package your software?  (To GODI and Debian maintainers:
>   would you be willing to contribute to it?)

I'm not quite sure what you're looking for here...  do you mean:

1. Information for new OCaml authors on writing Makefiles (or whatever)
   to build their programs/libraries?

2. Information for new OCaml authors on making their packages build
   on GODI or Debian?

3. Information for packagers on making others' packages build
   on GODI or Debian?

I'd say #1 is quite useful, and #2 could be for GODI at least.  However,
in general, instead of documenting existing procdures, I'd rather see
some effort go into designing new procedures that are easier to use.

> * Do you prefer a Savanah like interface (
>   or a GForge one ( or ...?

As a developer, I want something I can drive from a command line and
automate.  I don't mind having to log in somewhere if I can do it from a
command line.  I definately don't want to have to log in to a web site
to post stuff, check bugs, etc.

So, I say neither.

> * Are the services provided by these tools enough for you?  If not,
>   please be specific.

I'm not sure that a SourceForge derivative is really the right tool for
a CPAN alternative.  Those tools are more designed to facilitate
development of individual projects rather than to facilitate managing a
massive repository of related projects.

> * Are some people interested in setting up a mirror?

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