On 6 Jan 2015, at 18:27, Dave Scott <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> On 6 Jan 2015, at 15:49, Thomas Gazagnaire <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> 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. > > FYI over in the xapi-project we’ve been experimenting with putting design > docs in a central github repo and having github render them nicely e.g. > > http://xapi-project.github.io/design-docs/index.html > > We stick a header on top like > > --- > title: thin LVHD storage > layout: default > design_doc: true > revision: 1 > status: proposed > — > > and have a design doc index template > > https://github.com/xapi-project/xapi-project.github.io/blob/master/_layouts/design_docs_list.html > > So far it’s working quite well for us.
Oh wow, that's a lovely design! I'm just doing a mini overhaul of the Real World OCaml commenting system that created GitHub issues from paragraphs -- I could imagine that fitting in quite well to let people leave comments and do spec review more easily. -anil _______________________________________________ opam-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ocaml.org/listinfo/opam-devel
