Hello

Here is the latest OCaml Weekly News, for the week of December 10 to 17,
2024.

Table of Contents
─────────────────

Opam repository archival, Phase 1: unavailable packages
Proposed Package Archiving Policy for the opam Repository
QCheck 0.23
OCaml's Code of Conduct team - rotation of one team member
qcheck-lin and qcheck-stm 0.2
Old CWN


Opam repository archival, Phase 1: unavailable packages
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════

  Archive:
  <https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/opam-repository-archival-phase-1-unavailable-packages/15797/1>


Hannes Mehnert announced
────────────────────────

  It is my pleasure to announce below the list of opam packages that
  will move to the opam-repository-archive on January 1st 2025. In total
  there are 4170 opam files scheduled for being moved within 561 unique
  packages. This decreases the size of the opam-repository by roughly
  12.7%.

  This list contains all packages (a) marked as "available: false"
  (which may have various reasons: security issue, source unavailable, …
  - best to look into the "git log" for the specific package for the
  reason), and (b) packages which cannot be installed due to missing
  dependencies (with the packages mentioned in (a) being removed).

  The second list of packages (b) has been automatically generated by
  the [archive-opam] utility - developed purely for the opam-repository
  archival project, and this utility may have bugs.

  So, if you find a package in the list and you'd like to retain it in
  the opam-repository, there are some options:

  • (a) you can install it on your system (opam install <pkg>): this
    means there's a bug in the archive-opam utility, please provide the
    package name and version in the [opam-repository-archive Phase 1
    PR], together with your opam version, OCaml version, and operating
    system;
  • (b) it is not installable: please figure out the reasoning (the
    "Reasoning" may help you to find the root issue), and try to fix it
    yourself - if you're unable to fix the root cause, please also
    comment in the [opam-repository-archive Phase 1 PR] with the package
    name and version.

  If you've any questions, please don't hesitate to ask here or on
  GitHub or via another communication channel.

  You can help further on the archiving process:
  • as mentioned in the [last announcement] please add the
    [`x-maintenance-intent'] to your packages (a good choice for a lot
    of packages is `x-maintenance-intent: [("latest")]' if you're
    maintaining the latest version only) - this will be considered in
    Phase 3 (March 1st 2025);
  • if you are the author or maintainer of a package that is no longer
    useful or maintained, you can as well mark your opam files in the
    opam-repository with `flags: deprecated' (this will be taken into
    account in Phase 3 - March 1st 2025);
  • if you flagged your preliminary releases with `flags:
    avoid-version', and they can now be removed (e.g. since a stable
    version has been released), please open a pull request to replace
    the `avoid-version' with `deprecated'.

  Please note that the next Phase will be announced on January 15th with
  all packages that are only installable with OCaml < 4.08 - archiving
  is scheduled for February 1st.

  To keep track of the announcements, please look at the
  [opam-repository] tag.

  You can reproduce these lists by running `opam-archive --unavailable
  --dry-run --later-installable --pkg-all' using opam-archive at
  666a3b3886acfbcf82a7d73134247ccaa605510a and opam-repository at
  de786e28dbea73843ad5e5f0290a4e81fba39370.

  A big thanks to the [OCaml Software Foundation] for funding the
  opam-repository archival project.


[archive-opam] <https://github.com/hannesm/archive-opam>

[opam-repository-archive Phase 1 PR]
<https://github.com/ocaml/opam-repository-archive/pull/3>

[last announcement]
<https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/proposed-package-archiving-policy-for-the-opam-repository/15713#p-67031-call-to-action-4>

[`x-maintenance-intent']
<https://github.com/ocaml/opam-repository/blob/master/governance/policies/archiving.md#specification-of-the-x--fields-used-in-the-archiving-process>

[opam-repository] <https://discuss.ocaml.org/tag/opam-repository>

[OCaml Software Foundation] <https://ocaml-sf.org>

Packages scheduled for archiving (pkg-name: pkg-version[, pkg-version]*)
╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌

  /editor note/ Please find this long list in the post itself:
  <https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/opam-repository-archival-phase-1-unavailable-packages/15797>


Proposed Package Archiving Policy for the opam Repository
═════════════════════════════════════════════════════════

  Archive:
  <https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/proposed-package-archiving-policy-for-the-opam-repository/15713/6>


Continuing this thread, Hannes Mehnert announced
────────────────────────────────────────────────

  Hey,

  just a quick update on the proposed roadmap. The changes are we don't
  do `avoid-version' / `deprecated' flag cleanups in Phase 1. Instead,
  we plan to remove packages with `deprecated' flag in Phase 3. Packages
  with flag `avoid-version' will stay in opam-repository, but we reach
  out to maintainers and authors whether their intention is to mark
  these packages as deprecated (e.g. for alpha / beta releases and
  release candidates).

  Please find the updated roadmap below:

  • December 1st 2024: announcement of this proposal
  • December 15th 2024: announcement of the packages affected by Phase 1
    (uninstallable packages (“available: false”, “opam admin check
    –installability -i”)
  • January 1st 2025: Phase 1 cutting point: packages are moved to
    opam-repository-archive
  • January 15th 2025: announcement of the packages affected by Phase 2
    (OCaml lower bound 4.08)
  • February 1st 2025: Phase 2 cutting point: packages are moved to
    opam-repository-archive
  • February 15th 2025: initial spring cleaning, announcement of
    packages (based on maintenance-intent), and `flags: deprecated'
  • March 1st 2025: spring cleaning cutting point: packages are moved to
    opam-repository-archive
  • Every quarter: repeat Phase 3
  • Every year: reconsider Phase 2 with an increased OCaml lower bound


QCheck 0.23
═══════════

  Archive: <https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/ann-qcheck-0-23/15790/1>


Jan Midtgaard announced
───────────────────────

  I'm happy to announce the 0.23 release of `qcheck-core', `qcheck',
  `qcheck-alcotest', and `qcheck-ounit', along with a 0.5 release of
  `ppx_deriving_qcheck' :tada:

  The biggest user-visible change is the addition of a [qcheck-core
  overview documentation page] as well as clean-ups to the two module
  pages to provide a better overview of the different available
  features:
  • [QCheck]
  • [QCheck2]

  In more detail the 0.23 release has made the following changes:
  • Quote and escape in `Print.string' and `Print.char' in the `QCheck'
    module, mirroring the `QCheck2.Print' module's behaviour. Also quote
    and escape `Print.bytes' in both `QCheck' and `QCheck2'.
  • Clean-up `QCheck' and `QCheck2' documentation pages
  • Add `exponential' generator to `QCheck', `QCheck.Gen', and
    `QCheck2.Gen'
  • Add `Shrink.bool' and use it in `QCheck.bool'
  • Remove unread `fun_gen' field from `QCheck2''s `fun_repr_tbl' type
    thereby silencing a compiler warning

  The `ppx_deriving_qcheck' 0.5 release contains a fix to derive
  generators for mutually recursive data types involving records, thanks
  to a contribution from @Kakadu

  Happy testing! :smiley:


[qcheck-core overview documentation page]
<https://c-cube.github.io/qcheck/0.23/qcheck-core/index.html>

[QCheck]
<https://c-cube.github.io/qcheck/0.23/qcheck-core/QCheck/index.html>

[QCheck2]
<https://c-cube.github.io/qcheck/0.23/qcheck-core/QCheck2/index.html>


OCaml's Code of Conduct team - rotation of one team member
══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════

  Archive:
  <https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/ocamls-code-of-conduct-team-rotation-of-one-team-member/15791/1>


Sonja Heinze announced
──────────────────────

  A bit over two years ago, the OCaml community wrote and adopted a
  [code of conduct] and put together a code of conduct team. The code of
  conduct team is there for anyone in the community whenever they have
  concerns about behavior that falls within the scope of the code of
  conduct. It's currently made up of @c-cube, @Khady, @mseri, @rjbou
  myself.

  When putting together the code of conduct team, we mentioned that we'd
  rotate the team from time to time to keep it dynamic. We're now
  rotating one team member: I'm leaving the team and @shonfeder is
  joining. Thanks a lot, @shonfeder, for taking on this responsibility!

  Let's also use this opportunity to explain how the Code of Conduct
  team operates: We generally do not step in on our own initiative, but
  only when asked. That's to avoid having five community members acting
  as a kind of "overarching community police". That said, we will step
  in without being asked in extreme cases, but this has not happened so
  far. We do moderate and/or act when people reach out to us. That does
  happen from time to time.

  By the way, you can adopt the Code of Conduct yourself on your OCaml
  GitHub/GitLab repos by creating a `CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md`, containing the
  [CODE_OF_CONDUCT_TEMPLATE] - full instructions [here]. So far, it is
  already adopted on this discuss forum, the caml-list@inria.fr mailing
  list, the OCaml IRC, [OCaml discord], physical events like OCaml
  Workshop, and [these repositories]. Absolutely everyone is welcome to
  adopt it on their OCaml repository as well. Adopting it doesn't have a
  practical effect in a big majority of cases, but it always makes
  contributors, particularly newcomers, feel more welcome.

  Have a nice weekend everyone!  Best, @pitag on behalf of the whole
  Code of Conduct team


[code of conduct]
<https://github.com/ocaml/code-of-conduct/blob/main/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md>

[CODE_OF_CONDUCT_TEMPLATE]
<https://github.com/ocaml/code-of-conduct/blob/main/CODE_OF_CONDUCT_TEMPLATE.md>

[here]
<https://github.com/ocaml/code-of-conduct?tab=readme-ov-file#adopting-this-code-of-conduct>

[OCaml discord] <https://discord.com/invite/cCYQbqN>

[these repositories]
<https://github.com/ocaml/code-of-conduct/blob/main/list-of-adopters.md>


qcheck-lin and qcheck-stm 0.2
═════════════════════════════

  Archive:
  <https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/ann-qcheck-lin-and-qcheck-stm-0-2/12301/4>


Jan Midtgaard announced
───────────────────────

  I just rolled a 0.5 release of `qcheck-lin', `qcheck-stm', and
  `qcheck-multicoretests-util':
  <https://github.com/ocaml-multicore/multicoretests/releases/tag/0.5>

  The biggest news in the 0.5 release is the addition of
  `Util.Pp.pp_fun_' for printing function values generated with
  QCheck.To ensure quoted and escaped output for chars and strings, this
  required bumping the `qcheck-core' lower bound to the freshly released
  `qcheck-core.0.23'. This in turn, enabled a couple of other clean-ups:

  • #492: Also use the new, upstreamed `Gen.exponential' combinator in
     STM
  • #491: Require `qcheck.0.23', simplify show functions by utilizing
     it, and update expect outputs accordingly
  • #486: Add `Util.Pp.pp_fun_' printer for generated `QCheck.fun_'
     functions

  Happy testing and happy holidays! :smiley: :christmas_tree:


Old CWN
═══════

  If you happen to miss a CWN, you can [send me a message] and I'll mail
  it to you, or go take a look at [the archive] or the [RSS feed of the
  archives].

  If you also wish to receive it every week by mail, you may subscribe
  to the [caml-list].

  [Alan Schmitt]


[send me a message] <mailto:alan.schmitt@polytechnique.org>

[the archive] <https://alan.petitepomme.net/cwn/>

[RSS feed of the archives] <https://alan.petitepomme.net/cwn/cwn.rss>

[caml-list] <https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/info/caml-list>

[Alan Schmitt] <https://alan.petitepomme.net/>