Proposal ocaml guidelines

Hans de Goede j.w.r.degoede at
Fri May 4 10:03:51 UTC 2007

Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> Hans de Goede wrote:
>> The proposal I mailed to the list yesterday is now available here:
> 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.

This is taken from then PLD guidelines, I'm open to changing this. They advice 
to put the mli files (gzipped) in %doc when necessary, but to not ship them 
when there are other docs.

> 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:

Yes, I think that adding version info to the ocaml lib path would be a good 
idea, however the already existing packages don't do this, hence I didn't put 
it in my proposal. This would be something todo at the beginning of the F8 
cycle, if we agree that we want to change this.



More information about the fedora-devel-list mailing list