I have updated ocaml-findlib and about 10 more ocaml packages with this changes, I have also started to the spread the word on this move and I have been met with positive responses. I have a simple OCaml Package guidelines page up on the wiki: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/OCaml_Package_Guidelines This is already making PKGBUILDs for ocaml simpler and has repaired a number of build issues in packages. I am going to talk to the upstream maintainers, but I think that all I will be requesting is a name change on a few packages. BTW, how far along should I be before I apply to be a TU? -Thomas S Hatch On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 1:01 PM, Thomas S Hatch <thatch45@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 12:58 PM, Xyne <xyne@archlinux.ca> wrote:
Thomas S Hatch wrote:
Thanks Xyne, that helps, I am going to try and figure out the best way to change the ocaml packaging process without just breaking all of the OCaml packages, i will have the guidelines up shortly and star t moving towards clean ArchLinux Ocaml.
-Thomas S Hatch
There seems to be only 6 OCaml packages in the repos:
lablgtk lablgtk2 ocaml camlp5 camlp5-transitional llvm-ocaml
Check if they follow the guidelines that you propose and contact the maintainers of any that don't. If you explain the situation and provide a patch then you'll probably get a quick and positive response.
Before you do, consider whether the names need to be changed. Most library packages follow the convention of including the language name as a prefix, e.g. "perl-foo" or "haskell-bar". What's the state of the ocaml packages?
lablgtk should probably be ocaml-lablgtk, etc. Consider how few packages there are in the repos, I doubt there would be much opposition to fixing clearly broken names.
Regards, Xyne
Thanks again Xyne, will do. As for the naming of ocaml packages roght now, often there are duplicates in the AUR, I will put that down on my list to hunt down problems!
-Thomas S Hatch