I second the idea of having good names for libraries, and making the names consistent across archive files, the findlib package name, the godi package name, etc. For something like this to stick, we would need a well written proposal that is discussed on the main list, and then placed somewhere visible (such as in the ocamlweb project, currently served from ocaml-lang.org).
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 7:58 AM, Adrien <camarade...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > On 13/08/2012, Edgar Friendly <thelema...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Long-time backwards compatibility is a good reason to use camlzip. I > should > > be able to fix this when I get home from my current business trip. > > > > On the naming side, I look at the names of packages uploaded to oasis-db, > > and a disturbing percentage of them are "ocaml-foo", when they should > > probably be called just "foo". i.e. when I'm looking for fileutils, it's > > not sorted under 'f', but is under 'o' for ocaml-fileutils. Especially > for > > findlib package names, there's no good reason I can think of to have the > > ocaml- prefix. At one point in time, we had three copies of the camlzip > > package in oasis-db under different names; zip, camlzip and one more > that I > > can't remember (maybe a capitalization variant). > > > > Am I making too big a deal of this? Is there a good reason to prefix > newly > > created package names with "ocaml" or in the case of really old packages, > > "caml"? > > I think you're right. At least because it makes tab-completion annoying. > :-) > > I've already said that on IRC: I believe the name issue for findlib > packages is quite important. How serious can we look if we show > packages do not even _try_ to work on machines others than ours? And > is "zip" the same as "camlzip"? Maybe it's a completely different > binary. > > We're typically shy of bothering others with trivial issues which > would take a few seconds to fix but over the years, they amount to > bigger ones. We have broken links, broken English, typos, varying > package names or structures. We really need to improve that and for > documentation and wording, it's a simple as a git clone, and reading > the document in vim, emacs or any editor rather than in our web > browser. > > I'm far from perfect on that count and I don't usually have the time > but we should at least try; many small issues are trivial to fix. > > And for upstream META files, quite often, it's because upstream > doesn't know ocamlfind but considering how unobstrusive it is, there's > basically no opposition to at least provide a META file. Send an > e-mail, inquire about it. > > Regards, > Adrien Nader >
_______________________________________________ Godi-list mailing list Godi-list@ocaml-programming.de https://godirepo.camlcity.org/mailman/listinfo/godi-list
