On 22 Feb 2016, at 16:39, Hannes Mehnert <han...@mehnert.org> wrote: > > On 02/22/16 05:31 PM, Anil Madhavapeddy wrote: >> Interesting idea -- so this would mean that OPAM has to remap >> upstream versions into something that is a semantic version. >> >> Does Elm eliminate this by mandating that libraries should >> "natively" all be semantically versioned? We can't do this in >> OCaml today since there are too many upstream packages with >> their own versioning notions. > > Elm seems to check whether the API is compatible, and if not, only > accepts a release if major is bumped: > https://github.com/elm-lang/elm-package#version-rules > > What does "own versioning notions" mean? I'd appreciate if the > community would enforce (by peer pressure and adequate tooling) semantic > versioning for the main opam-repository.
I mean that there are hundreds of OCaml packages that existed before OPAM that have their own versioning conventions (most of which are not semantically versioned), and these are directly mapped into OPAM package versions. It would be incredibly useful to have an enforcement of semantic versioning, but at this stage in the current repository would require a mass remapping of upstream versions into the scheme. Anil _______________________________________________ opam-devel mailing list opam-devel@lists.ocaml.org http://lists.ocaml.org/listinfo/opam-devel
