[opam-devel] OPAM Roadmap -- what next ?
agarwal1975 at gmail.com
Sun Dec 21 15:22:30 GMT 2014
> Having a way to have multiple versions of the same library installed in
the same switch could be very cool as well
frameworks, which I can copy into my repo manually or manage with something
like Bower. However, I'd rather have everything via opam, so I started a
repo for this . The files of these packages are simply copied at build
time, and thus there's no reason I couldn't have multiple versions of
jquery installed at the same time. (I appreciate this is not a priority use
On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 8:51 AM, Daniel Bünzli <daniel.buenzli at erratique.ch>
> Le dimanche, 21 décembre 2014 à 14:26, Peter Zotov a écrit :
> > Through ocamlfind, of course, there's nothing else now.
> > Sure. But note that ocamlfind explicitly refuses to deal with versioning
> > constraints; it's even in the manual. So the dependencies of neither
> > A.1 nor A.2 are not expressible in META.
> That's the point, I'm not asking ocamlfind to resolve any versioning
> constraints. It's all based on the name of the package (if . is not allowed
> in the name then substitute by another character). With this packages are
> able to specify a dependency on a particular version.
> I don't see that as a long term solution; I hope we can eventually get rid
> of that hideous naming resolution hydra and menagerie of meta files we have
> now (which basically means ocamlfind should go). However I suspect that the
> underlying mecanism (install each package in PKG.VERSION directory) will be
> similar for whatever replaces the current mess, so there's no harm in
> having it now.
> opam-devel mailing list
> opam-devel at lists.ocaml.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the opam-devel