Re: [Caml-list] odb questions

["Daniel Bünzli" <daniel.buenzli@erratique.ch>]

Le mercredi, 7 mars 2012 à 16:58, Edgar Friendly a écrit :
> > IMHO a package should be identified by a name and version.
>  
> I've been thinking about this for a long time, and the full consequences  
> of this involve not only deep changes to odb internals, but also expose  
> the code to a ton more edge cases that need to be handled, as well as  
> possibly some NP-hard problems of resolving version dependencies. Odb  
> may go this way if needed, but the current practice of having a single  
> string as the package identifier is sufficient for my use, so...


Yes, I understand that. I fear there's dependency hell waiting around the corner, but maybe this can be mitigated by implementing that idea of being able to easily specify your own package source in ~/.odb/packages. Well, in fact you can already do that locally by crafting your own ~/.odb/packages file. So maybe your approach is the right balancing act between usability and complexity.  

> You're more than welcome to fork and build a better odb. I may even  
> steal any good ideas you have and put them back in my odb. :)


If I get too annoyed with too much time on my hands (i.e. very unlikely) I may eventually do that.  

Thanks for the answers and the tool,  

Daniel