From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.105]) by walapai.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id pBECDVh4029878 for ; Wed, 14 Dec 2011 13:13:31 +0100 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AjABAN2R6E7U4367kGdsb2JhbABDhQimICIBAQEBCQkNBxQDIoFyAQEEASNWBQsLGAICJgICVwYTFIdmAqUqkgaBL4lEgRYEjQ6NM4xd X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.71,351,1320620400"; d="scan'208";a="123329915" Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.187]) by mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 14 Dec 2011 13:13:27 +0100 Received: from office1.lan.sumadev.de (dslb-188-097-012-119.pools.arcor-ip.net [188.97.12.119]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (node=mreu0) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0MgaZf-1RPa4x2sdT-00NroN; Wed, 14 Dec 2011 13:13:16 +0100 Received: from [192.168.178.11] (546BF816.cm-12-4d.dynamic.ziggo.nl [84.107.248.22]) by office1.lan.sumadev.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 40518C00C7; Wed, 14 Dec 2011 13:13:16 +0100 (CET) From: Gerd Stolpmann To: oliver Cc: Jesper Louis Andersen , Xavier Leroy , caml-list@inria.fr In-Reply-To: <20111213193656.GB5387@siouxsie> References: <55531934-37A5-4CC5-AB67-20CE4CCE8269@googlemail.com> <4EE37070.4010702@inria.fr> <1323601377.6079.40.camel@samsung> <20111213193656.GB5387@siouxsie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 13:13:15 +0100 Message-ID: <1323864795.7750.11.camel@samsung> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.32.2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:/EF4S0O8XZt75iX2XM0GqnV4BRa7BTym6lmvTHwW9jA w/tHKIkBFcyfBs1eWdKKUQscIBiU18Y3Kh+N/7LcbVmRx3Lt1s FWgmsMTFixT9uqGRJwbIPObJwW3nfU22PYP5ghk8E9Pr+rA0/E B3/0OiXpVRy9uJ6MvCCiGKvUY4BVir9ShAeessVlQxJVEpy8ko CWhnoj69j6WXmgFIxlkbieXd9H4sd6hw2JB3fPkaWKRDr2VqNb T19grTrzTm8YofUfYtiHHUuHD2BulpENGPVe5Ei9IidSNgACnT Xe0nMpPKLRiLxyqng3DdhtZ9Gn08A7fYbzGrQwh9eJSKtKHqqb MQ2i01BAuRTUFe9poSo7WwoZbtGGGE5VuFtPf9oZw Subject: Re: [Caml-list] OCaml maintenance status / community fork (again) Am Dienstag, den 13.12.2011, 20:36 +0100 schrieb oliver: > Hello, > > > installing packages in R also is quite easy. Well, package management for scripting languages is way easier. You can especially do some of the management at load time. If, for example, a symbol is missing because a predecessor is too old, there is generally the possibility to work around by providing an alternate definition, and to resolve this within the scripting environment. A statically typed compiler language like Ocaml is more difficult, because you can do these kinds of fixups only at build time. Part of this is that you need to recompile all successors of a package if you upgrade the package. > In a running R you just type "install.packages("RMySQL")" > get a window to select a server and things then happen > automagically: source download, compilation, installation. > either in a systemwide manner or if permissions of your session > do not allow it, somewhere beyond your local $HOME. > It's even easier than with Perl / CPAN. > > (And using not the official CRAN packages is easy: just > change the setting of the used repository and you could > install the newest/freshest stuff easily too.) > > > Or when installing at the OS level not officially supported packages > on Arch linux (for official ones you could just use > the installer pacman), then makepgg will help you. > For installation as well as creating packages by your own. > > > > > On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 12:02:57PM +0100, Gerd Stolpmann wrote: > > Am Sonntag, den 11.12.2011, 00:28 +0100 schrieb Jesper Louis Andersen: > > > On Sat, Dec 10, 2011 at 15:45, Xavier Leroy wrote: > > > > > > > 2- As pointed out already in this discussion, it's not on the Caml compiler > > > > that community efforts are most needed. For example, the most impactful > > > > action that his community could take, in my opinion, is to adopt and embrace > > > > a common packaging system like Cabal for Haskell. > > > > > > This one piqued my interest somewhat. I should refrain from > > > commenting, but I can't help myself. > > > > It's interesting to hear these comments. In short, in ocaml we have > > these options: > > > > - Full featured package management: we have this (GODI), but the > > community is not too large (package maintainers are always > > welcome!) As every full-featured system, GODI has complicated > > parts, and you need to invest 1-2 days before you fully > > understand it and can build packages. > [...] > > And why to use GODI and create OCaml/GODI packages and not > a *.deb or *.rpm or PKGBUILD/tgz? The question includes the answer. Do you really want to support five different package types? > Or does GODI also allows creation of such OS-related packages? Not yet, but this is certainly not impossible with a to-be-written package converter. So far, there has been nobody who investigated this in detail. (Actually, I'm a bit surprised that none of the OS packagers had the idea yet - this could save a lot of time for them.) Gerd > > > Ciao, > Oliver >