Hi, OK, I think the convention that a library which understands the format "foo" is called "foo-format" is fine. Thanks for the reminder about the ocamlfind package name too. I've updated two packages (and ocamlfind names):
pcap-format vhd-format (Note there still may be a clash between the module names defined in these ocamlfind packages and other similar ones making it hard to compile them into the same program -- I guess namespaces will help with this eventually) The pcap-format package update pull request is pending review[1] while the vhd-format package has already been merged into OCamlPro/opam-repository on github. Cheers, Dave [1] https://github.com/OCamlPro/opam-repository/pull/917 On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 9:29 AM, Anil Madhavapeddy <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks for bringing it up. As you can see, we're lazily evaluating > policies in this space :-) > > -anil > > On 11 Jul 2013, at 09:21, Johan Mazel <[email protected]> wrote: > > Actually, I just sent this email to expose the problem. > I do not have a very good understanding of naming policies and so on. So, > I think I am way under-qualified to propose a solution. > From my own point of view, any name would be ok, included the proposed > "pcap-format". :) > Regards. > Johan > > > 2013/7/10 Sylvain Le Gall <[email protected]> > >> In Debian we have a loose 'naming' policy for that: >> >> http://pkg-ocaml-maint.alioth.debian.org/ocaml_packaging_policy.html/c305.html >> >> Most of the time, we decide to consider that a library ocaml-blah >> provides blah if the findlib name is blah. In this case we name the >> package libblah-ocaml-dev. >> >> Basically we are considering that findlib names are unique and we map >> to them. As a matter of fact this make sense and if you have a naming >> problem it probably means that you cannot install both library at the >> same time ! (because findlib will be confused if two different >> libraries have the same name). >> >> Althought these are guidelines and not really enforced. >> >> 2013/7/10 Anil Madhavapeddy <[email protected]>: >> > Hi Johan, David, >> > >> > The existing OPAM policy is simply to package by consensus. If you >> could >> > both agree on suitable and unique names and submit a pull request or >> issue >> > to http://github.com/OCamlPro/opam-repository, we will merge the >> changes >> > into the stable repository. >> > >> > The same issue has come up with a couple of other packages (such as >> > openflow, or vhd as David points out). It would be good to distinguish >> > them with a prefix less generic than "ocaml-" if possible. For example, >> > if Dave's pcap bindings are just the format and not the library, it >> might >> > be appropriate to call it pcap-format. >> > >> > best, >> > Anil >> > >> > On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 08:01:46AM +0100, David Scott wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> >> >> Is there a pattern we should apply more generally? I know of two other >> >> packages which both implement functions to read/write .vhd format disk >> >> files. One is a binding to a C lib "vhd" and the other is a pure ocaml >> >> implementation of the spec. They have disjoint feature sets, so both >> are >> >> useful. Initially both were just called "vhd" in opam. Since then the C >> >> binding one was renamed "libvhd" IIRC. >> >> >> >> I'm happy to rename the ocaml-pcap to whatever makes the most sense. >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> Dave >> >> >> >> On Wednesday, July 10, 2013, Johan Mazel wrote: >> >> >> >> > Hi >> >> > There currently is an OPAM package called pcap based on ocaml-pcap ( >> >> > https://github.com/djs55/ocaml-pcap). >> >> > However, the OCaml binbings to libpcap have the same name: pcap. >> These >> >> > bindings are still relevant because they provides bindings to live >> capture >> >> > on network interface. >> >> > >> >> > Would it be possible to change the current OPAM package to something >> else >> >> > like cstruct-pcap ? It would allow one to install both packages in >> OPAM. >> >> > Regards. >> >> > Johan Mazel >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Dave Scott >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Platform mailing list >> >> [email protected] >> >> http://lists.ocaml.org/listinfo/platform >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Platform mailing list >> > [email protected] >> > http://lists.ocaml.org/listinfo/platform >> _______________________________________________ >> Platform mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.ocaml.org/listinfo/platform >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > Platform mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ocaml.org/listinfo/platform > > -- Dave Scott
_______________________________________________ Platform mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ocaml.org/listinfo/platform
