Thanks Louis for the great summary! > - The forking and providing replacements would be really useful for Mirage, > where we're having an active discussion about how to provide Xen-specific > versions of certain packages such as Zarith. Thomas (with any surname), > opinions on this?
My opinion: I was very keen to have this feature on the bug tracker, but with all the designs details in mind I'm much less keen now. It introduces a lot of complexity with pinning so would be nice to see what we can simplify. For instance, maybe we could forbid virtual packages - and pin only to real packages. Need to think a bit more about that. a more meta comments: if we put design files in the repo (I'm not very fond of that, but why not), could we have a header specifying the status of the document (ie. draft, partially implemented, deprecated, etc...) and the target opam versions. And keep that up-to-date please. Thanks, Thomas > > - How much damage will this do to the internal solver heuristics? > > -anil > >> On 5 Jan 2015, at 08:36, Louis Gesbert <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hi all, and happy new year ! >> >> I just added to opam a design proposal to open discussion on the >> implementation of the 'provides' field and its use-cases. >> >> It's at https://github.com/ocaml/opam/blob/master/doc/design/provides.md >> >> Cheers, >> Louis >> _______________________________________________ >> opam-devel mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.ocaml.org/listinfo/opam-devel >> > > > _______________________________________________ > MirageOS-devel mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.xenproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mirageos-devel _______________________________________________ opam-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ocaml.org/listinfo/opam-devel
