Dear all, I'm resurrecting this thread to get some information about the current status of CUDF solver packaging on Fedora.
I am myself a happy user of the COPR ascpud packages, but for new Fedora users it would be nice to have something packaged in the main repository. Is that a possibility? On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 5:34 PM, Anil Madhavapeddy <[email protected]> wrote: > On 26 Jan 2015, at 15:31, Jon Ludlam <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 02:18:26PM +0000, Anil Madhavapeddy wrote: >>> See below for Gabriel's message to the Fedora list. Gabriel: thanks for >>> kicking this off! I would appreciate being CCed in on this (or better, >>> opam-devel if cross posting is ok), as I maintain the semi-official OPAM >>> Fedora packages right now that point people to the OBS service. >>> >>> In the interests of sanity, I'd rather not have two divergent sets of >>> instructions for Coq users and the general OPAM population, so if we switch >>> to Copr, then the official OPAM instructions should also switch. In the >>> longer term, the packages will get into Fedora and everything will be fine, >>> but don't forget that in the medium term that the Yum remotes will remain >>> on people's computers for some time, and there's significant confusion in >>> mixing up OBS and Copr packages. >>> >>> For Coq users right now, I think it's wiser to point them to the OPAM web >>> pages which in turn point to my OBS repositories, rather than pointing them >>> to Jon's. The reason is that mine are better tested, but they also use the >>> bundled OCaml packages, whereas Jon's are upstream-friendly and break out >>> the OPAM dependencies. There have been bugs from doing this in the past >>> (e.g. with a libdose3 mismatch), so it's best to let this settle down >>> upstream before pointing a large user base at a Copr remote that may still >>> be a moving target. >>> >> >> Totally agreed. There's probably still be an argument for pointing out the >> aspcud copr remote though - should that go onto the main opam page? > > Sounds good -- although can we perhaps abstract it to an 'ocaml' account and > share the details? Since the repo names stick around, it's quite stifling to > have your personal branch be used by people. > > Finally having aspcud is very very nice. I'll try to get it on OBS soon as > well from your RPMs. > > -anil _______________________________________________ opam-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ocaml.org/listinfo/opam-devel
