[ocaml-infra] Wireframe demo of OCaml.og
Sylvain Le Gall
sylvain+ocaml at le-gall.net
Fri Mar 15 13:06:12 GMT 2013
2013/3/15 Maxence Guesdon <Maxence.Guesdon at inria.fr>:
> On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 11:33:31 +0100
> Sylvain Le Gall <sylvain+ocaml at le-gall.net> wrote:
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: Sylvain Le Gall <sylvain+ocaml at le-gall.net>
>> Date: 2013/3/15
>> Subject: Re: [ocaml-infra] Wireframe demo of OCaml.og
>> To: Maxence Guesdon <Maxence.Guesdon at inria.fr>
>> 2013/3/15 Maxence Guesdon <Maxence.Guesdon at inria.fr>:
>> > On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 16:53:47 +0000
>> > Amir Chaudhry <amc79 at cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>> >> Dear all,
>> >> I've been working on putting together wireframes to demonstrate aspects of the design and functionality we'd like to introduce into the OCaml.org website. Today, I published a blog post summarising this work, which includes screencasts and a link to a clickable demo you can play with.
>> >> http://amirchaudhry.com/wireframe-demos-for-ocamlorg
>> >> I'd be keen to know what you think so please send any feedback via the infrastructure mailing list (infrastructure at lists.ocaml.org).
>> > Hello,
>> > Thanks for this presentation. This made me think about the future of the
>> > Caml Hump. Now that Opam is the ocaml package manager, would it be
>> > possible to merge Opam and Hump ?
>> > I mean: could it be possible to create some kind of "info" packages in
>> > opam to indicate that a library/tool/... exists but is not packaged
>> > yet ? With a flag to make them appear in opam list and search ?
>> > This could encourage contributors to package not yet packaged tools and
>> > libs.
>> > Regarding tags, it is possible that I missed the information, but is
>> > opam going to handle tags associated to packages ? (I saw some
>> > tag-based search in packages in Amir's demos)
>> > With these "info" packages and a tag system, opam should be able to
>> > replace the hump, allowing anobody to contribute to (this
>> > replacmenet of) the hump.
>> > At last, I also saw in Amir's demos news feeds associated to packages.
>> > Will the RSS feed be indicated in opam package information ?
>> That lead me to think about oasis-db in fact. You can upload .tar.gz
>> directly into oasis-db and get it easily (there is a REST API to get
>> data out of oasis-db). We also already have an RSS feed et al. The
>> only missing piece is a command line tool to upload (half a lie, since
>> the tool exists but is not released).
>> I think merging providing Hump info through OASIS-DB is a 0day work.
> Apart from putting information in form, which is the longest part of
The only real field to fill in the URL where you can download the
.tar.gz and its optional (in this case we use a local copy). The order
parameter should be correct if you don't have a crazy versionning
The package name and version are guessed based on configure.ac/META
file or _oasis . The name/version are only editable when we have to
guess (i.e. no _oasis in the tarball).
I would say uploading a tarball and filling 1 field in a form is not a
big deal. The command line interface allows you to directly upload the
tarball with the URL (good for automatisation).
>> The RSS:
> Well, this is a oasis-db feed, not a per-package feed as such one
> appeared in Amir's demos, on the Core package page.
Sorry, read too fast. I will probably add a couple of fields like
ProjectRSSFeed, ProjectGooglePlus, ProjectGithub and ProjectTwitter to
Also, I am wondering if it is not damaging to have a feed with very
little news for pakcages (Core has content in its feed, but this is
not a general case). E.g. there is a lot of small projects/libraries.
>> The API:
>> Looking at the wireframe, I think we should also consider displaying
>> GODI and OASIS-DB information. This can be very useful to dev that can
>> quickly see that there are 1 version behind of a package (e.g.
>> ocaml-expect is lagging one version behind in OPAM wrt to OASIS-DB).
> I think there should be one and only one place to put information about
> packages feeding the ocaml.org website.
I beg you to reconsider this. I know it is easier and nicer to have
only one package manager and one place to look for, but I don't think
skipping other sources is good. You should at least consider the
option to do so. I really don't want to see GODI and OASIS-DB removed
from the big picture.
More information about the Infrastructure