Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
Hans de Goede wrote:
The proposal I mailed to the list yesterday is now available here:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/OCaml
What's the thinking behind removing *.mli by default? Even in packages
which are well documented, the *.mli files are the definitive reference
for programmers. I think they should always be in the -devel subpackage.
This is taken from then PLD guidelines, I'm open to changing this. They advice
to put the mli files (gzipped) in %doc when necessary, but to not ship them
when there are other docs.
Along the same lines I notice that there is no version information in
the path. Early on Debian used the major.minor format (eg.
/usr/lib/ocaml/3.06/) but they found out the hard way that the *.cmo &
*.cmx format can change incompatibly on every release (even bugfixes) so
they now put the full version number in the path. See:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-ocaml-maint/2005/01/msg00067.html
http://lists.debian.org/debian-ocaml-maint/2005/01/msg00050.html
http://lists.debian.org/debian-ocaml-maint/2005/01/msg00056.html
Yes, I think that adding version info to the ocaml lib path would be a good
idea, however the already existing packages don't do this, hence I didn't put
it in my proposal. This would be something todo at the beginning of the F8
cycle, if we agree that we want to change this.
Regards,
Hans
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
