> - Anil Madhavapeddy, 26/08/2015 18:49 - > One thing I noticed is that the automatic plugin installation doesn't > play well with non-interactivity (e.g. -y), btw.
It should work with `OPAMYES=1` ; it's otherwise a bit difficult to parse the command-line arguments that are normally directed towards a different program. Or should we allow something like `opam -y publish` ? Or normalise the arguments a plugin is supposed to accept ? I don't see a very nice solution to this... > > -anil > > > On 19 Aug 2015, at 10:56, Louis Gesbert <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Allowing plugins with packages named `opam-xxx` in opam 1.3 sure won't cost > > much. I don't see a good reason not to add it now even if it can't be used > > in a while. > > > >> - Fabrice Le Fessant, 19/08/2015 11:49 - > >> I think it's worth doing it, even if we also keep the old logic for > >> compatilibility for a few years from now, until Ubuntu LTS is dead. > >> Otherwise, we will either have to limit opam plugin names to avoid > >> conflicts with existing packages (for example, "cache" is already a > >> package, preventing "opam-cache", etc.), either to reserve names for > >> possible plugins ("search", "file", "git", etc). > > > > "search" is already an opam command :) > >
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ opam-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ocaml.org/listinfo/opam-devel
