Hello, On Thu, Feb 26, 2004 at 08:28:19PM -0600, John Goerzen wrote: > On Fri, Feb 27, 2004 at 01:26:06AM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Well, i think you know my point of view... I think it is better to have > > a main repository for all debian ocaml packages : > > - if a problem arise in one package, that you need help from another DD, > > it is the best way to share effort ( i have some experienced syncing > > with Mr Edward -- was really easy ). > > Indeed some sort of a repository does aid that effort. But Debian > packages are highly independant little units and don't really require a > central repository. >
At least we agree on this point. > > - if you are away, that some of us need to do some special things... it > > is better to have one working version ( for example i am used to > > inject watch file in debian/... I can do it on packages that doesn't > > belong to me, without the need to call every maintainer to say : hey > > it would be a good idea to do this or that ). > > The normal way to do this in Debian is submit a wishlist bug with a > patch. > Well, from time to time i submit patch : it really demand of the kind of people who are maintainer ( ranging from good maintainer to MIA ), with a team you can have a ((good maintainer + MIA) / 2) ( yeah should be MAX(good maintainer, MIA), but i don't think it is the reality ). > Of course, if you're a co-maintainer of part of a "packaging team", then > this is a little different. > > Personally, for my package, I welcome and encourage patches, but I want > to be the one to decide if they get applied to the sources. That way, I > know what's going on with the code, and have a chance to spot potential > problems. > Well, ocaml related packaging only have 10 to 20 files.... Not a big deal with code. Does this also means that for example if we decide to switch to ocaml-3.07-1 you won't do it ? Ie : maintaining a central repo allow one people to grep/sed all 3.07 -> 3.07-1 those reducing the load for every one. And i don't think you will say, no this patch is not... > > - it permits to hijack some package ( like the thing i will do next week > > : hijacking numerix ). > > That's possible anyway. > > > And optionally : > > What difficulties have you regarding svn ? ( at the beginning i think > > you were a pro pkg-ocaml-maint ) > > OK, this is a question I can answer, as a convert from svn. > > The main problem is that it's difficult to maintain local svn trees. > Say I had my package in pkg-ocaml-maint, and was going to go offline for > the weekend, taking my laptop with me with no Internet connection. I > could either go the weekend without checking in any changes. Or I could > create my own Subversion repos, check in the originals, check things in, > and when I return, check in one big batch that loses all the history for > what I did over the weekend -- plus have to manually merge and sync this > all the time. > > With tla, I simply branch off the main repo to my laptop repo, and when > I get back, tla star-merge back into the main repo. Change history from > my laptop preserved. > > Basically, Subversion is better if you are frequently interested in > finding out exactly what happened to a file when. Arch his better if you > are frequently interested in merging in changes and working with others. > Both can, of course, do both tasks; these are just the areas in which > they excel. > Ok, i understand your point of view. I am just converted from CVS, maybe in one year i will be a converted from SVN ( ;-) ). > > No, i think it is a good idea to have a list of ocaml related package... > > Just to know which ocaml related software are around.... > > grep-available -sPackage -FPackage ocaml > ;-) Kind regard Sylvain LE GALL -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
