Re: Need feedback on ocaml-atd review request

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



I am currently traveling, with only my phone for accessing email, so please pardon top posting, HTML, etc. I also have the goal of bringing Infer to Fedora, so I am happy to make common cause with you.

Are you aware of my efforts to build an OCaml spec generator?  See https://pagure.io/opam2rpm. It isn't finished, but it is useful for getting started.

I can be more helpful next week when I am home & have my beloved Fedora desktop in front of me. :-)

On Thu, Apr 8, 2021, 4:02 PM Michel Alexandre Salim <michel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi all,

It's been a while since I work on an OCaml spec, so I'm asking the
ocaml-devel list (and because it seems inactive, cc:ing rjones and
jjames since they maintain a lot of OCaml packages.

I'm working through the missing dependencies to eventually package
Infer, Facebook's static analysis tool -- https://fbinfer.com/ -- which
is written in OCaml.

The first such dependency is atdgen, which is part of atd:
https://github.com/ahrefs/atd

Review request: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1947685

This is a single project that ends up generating several related OPAM
packages. The automatic requires/provides seem to identify the modules
it provides correctly, so... do I need to split the packaging to
individual modules, or is it fine to ship only ocaml-atd and ocaml-atd-
devel?

(My infer package can then depend on ocaml(Atdgen) instead of
hardcoding the specific RPM name, so if I end up splitting the package
later it is not affected)

On a related note, the packaging guidelines is rather out of date:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/OCaml/

I have a minor PR for fixing the link back to the main guidelines:
https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/pull-request/1065

but found the example spec there really obsolete; I ended up basing my
spec on jjames' ocaml-menhir.

Likewise, the spec generated by `rpmdev-newspec -t ocaml` is out of
date and roughly corresponds with the spec in the packaging guidelines.

Is there an interest in revamping the documentation and template? Maybe
ship a separate template for ocaml-dune for projects that use dune as
as its build system?

Best regards,

--
Michel Alexandre Salim
profile: https://keyoxide.org/michel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux