> Having a way to have multiple versions of the same library installed in the same switch could be very cool as well
For websites, I need to pull in various Javascript libraries and CSS frameworks, which I can copy into my repo manually or manage with something like Bower. However, I'd rather have everything via opam, so I started a repo for this [1]. The files of these packages are simply copied at build time, and thus there's no reason I couldn't have multiple versions of jquery installed at the same time. (I appreciate this is not a priority use case.) [1] https://github.com/solvuu/opam-repo-web On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 8:51 AM, Daniel Bünzli <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Le dimanche, 21 décembre 2014 à 14:26, Peter Zotov a écrit : > > > Through ocamlfind, of course, there's nothing else now. > > > > Sure. But note that ocamlfind explicitly refuses to deal with versioning > > constraints; it's even in the manual. So the dependencies of neither > > A.1 nor A.2 are not expressible in META. > > That's the point, I'm not asking ocamlfind to resolve any versioning > constraints. It's all based on the name of the package (if . is not allowed > in the name then substitute by another character). With this packages are > able to specify a dependency on a particular version. > > I don't see that as a long term solution; I hope we can eventually get rid > of that hideous naming resolution hydra and menagerie of meta files we have > now (which basically means ocamlfind should go). However I suspect that the > underlying mecanism (install each package in PKG.VERSION directory) will be > similar for whatever replaces the current mess, so there's no harm in > having it now. > > Daniel > > > _______________________________________________ > opam-devel mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ocaml.org/listinfo/opam-devel >
_______________________________________________ opam-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ocaml.org/listinfo/opam-devel
