Proposal ocaml guidelines

Hans de Goede j.w.r.degoede at
Fri May 4 10:06:43 UTC 2007

Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> Nigel Jones wrote:
>> Sorry to come into the discussion a bit later than expected.
>> 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.
>> I replaced it in ocaml-SDL and ocaml-camlimages with ocamldoc generated
>> html references, which seems to be pretty much the same as the
>> individual mli files.
> But I wanna use 'less'!
> Seriously, I don't want to fire up a browser just to check an interface. 
>  Even the text mode browsers have serious UI problems compared to
> 'less /usr/lib/ocaml/3.08.3/list.mli'.
> Is there any reason why *.mli files can't be included in a -devel 
> package?  I'm not talking about the main library package where it would 
> add bloat, but in a package which would only need to be installed by 
> developers.

Other then size, no. So if there is a use for them, and appearantly there is, I 
guess the not shipping of them should be removed from the guidelines (thats why 
they are a draft :)



More information about the fedora-devel-list mailing list