[opam-devel] opam publish package name
anil at recoil.org
Wed Aug 26 18:49:23 BST 2015
Yeah, after some thought I agree with you and Fabrice. Even though it'll
take a few years to percolate through, having the right semantics in the
core tool is more important than a transitionary period. It wont cost much
to maintain two copies of important plugins.
One thing I noticed is that the automatic plugin installation doesn't
play well with non-interactivity (e.g. -y), btw.
> On 19 Aug 2015, at 10:56, Louis Gesbert <louis.gesbert at ocamlpro.com> wrote:
> Allowing plugins with packages named `opam-xxx` in opam 1.3 sure won't cost much. I don't see a good reason not to add it now even if it can't be used in a while.
>> - Fabrice Le Fessant, 19/08/2015 11:49 -
>> I think it's worth doing it, even if we also keep the old logic for
>> compatilibility for a few years from now, until Ubuntu LTS is dead.
>> Otherwise, we will either have to limit opam plugin names to avoid
>> conflicts with existing packages (for example, "cache" is already a
>> package, preventing "opam-cache", etc.), either to reserve names for
>> possible plugins ("search", "file", "git", etc).
> "search" is already an opam command :)
More information about the opam-devel