Proposal ocaml guidelines

[Richard W.M. Jones]

Hans de Goede wrote:
> The proposal I mailed to the list yesterday is now available here:
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/OCaml

What's the thinking behind removing *.mli by default?  Even in packages 
which are well documented, the *.mli files are the definitive reference 
for programmers.  I think they should always be in the -devel subpackage.

Debian even include *.ml files in certain situations:

$ dpkg -S /usr/lib/ocaml/3.08.3/list.ml
ocaml-nox: /usr/lib/ocaml/3.08.3/list.ml

Along the same lines I notice that there is no version information in 
the path.  Early on Debian used the major.minor format (eg. 
/usr/lib/ocaml/3.06/) but they found out the hard way that the *.cmo & 
*.cmx format can change incompatibly on every release (even bugfixes) so 
they now put the full version number in the path.  See:

http://lists.debian.org/debian-ocaml-maint/2005/01/msg00067.html
http://lists.debian.org/debian-ocaml-maint/2005/01/msg00050.html
http://lists.debian.org/debian-ocaml-maint/2005/01/msg00056.html

Rich.

-- 
Emerging Technologies, Red Hat  http://et.redhat.com/~rjones/
64 Baker Street, London, W1U 7DF     Mobile: +44 7866 314 421

Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod
Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SL4 1TE, United Kingdom.
Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 3798903
Directors: Michael Cunningham (USA), Charlie Peters (USA) and David
Owens (Ireland)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 3237 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20070504/d34af62f/attachment.bin>