FWIW, great to have this in community. Not so great that a deletion request is the first thing that informs me about this and even less so to have somebody else run off with the work that I put into figuring out how to make this piece of software install correctly and only add a few mostly cosmetic changes for good measure, without even a mention. The process isn’t just './configure; make; make install'; at least for me it took a while to figure everything out, and I’m not exactly a newbie to all the crazy stuff that OCaml people tend to use in their build infrastructure. While I’m at it, I wonder what the purpose is behind not depending on OCaml for a tool aimed at building OCaml software. Secondly, OPAM is run automatically on most invocations of dune to my knowledge, so I believe depending on it is somewhat reasonable. And lastly, the sources of dune happen to mention in plain English that dune can make use of ocamlfind as an optional runtime dependency[1]. So much for my reasoning on the dependencies, I would have been happy to explain this earlier if someone had let me. Forgive me if I’m a little upset, but when the new community package even goes out of it’s way to provide compatibility with the versioning scheme I used on the jbuilder package before it was renamed to dune, I just don’t understand why not even a little heads-up à la “BTW this package is now in community” was possible. Personally, I even left a contributor line saying “Your Name <yourem...@domain.com>” untouched in one of the packages I adopted, just to let people know that I’m not the only person who ever invested time in that package (namely ocp-build).
tl;dr I know that in written form my thoughts tend to come off as being more furious than I actually am, and while I do in fact not like what I believe went on, what I really want you, Bruno, to take away from this is just „Please be a little more communicative in the future” :) Have a nice day Jakob Gahde aka J5lx [1] https://github.com/ocaml/dune/blob/1.0%2Bbeta17/jbuilder.opam#L17-L22 On Mon, 19 Feb 2018, at 15:34, not...@aur.archlinux.org wrote: > mis [1] filed a deletion request for dune [2]: > > in [community] > https://www.archlinux.org/packages/community/x86_64/dune/ > > [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/mis/ > [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/dune/
