[ocaml-platform] [opam-devel] OPAM 1.1.1 RC

[Louis Gesbert]

On Wednesday 15 January 2014 11:22:08 Christophe Troestler wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Jan 2014 10:27:54 +0100, Louis Gesbert wrote:
> > 
> > Indeed, that would break (quite badly) -- Thomas thought that the url file already supported (unused) archive lists, but that must have been removed at some point.
> > If it's very important to have this now, I can modify the patch so that it only changes the repo in a 1.1.0-compatible way, by adding a `mirror` field instead of changing the current type of the `archive` and similar fields. I tend to think that the smoothness of upgrade may be worth the slightly less clear resulting file format.
> > 
> > Any opinions on this ? The problem still exists even if we shift that after release.
> 
> Does it break if we allow several archive fields?

The OPAM file formats in general don't allow duplicated fields, so we would need to add a deeper-rooted exception for this. As we are not _that_ hurried, 1.1.1 will be without that patch so that the repo migration can be done properly.