[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Proposal ocaml guidelines



On Fri, 2007-05-04 at 10:58 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> Nigel Jones wrote:
> > Sorry to come into the discussion a bit later than expected.
> > Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> >> Hans de Goede wrote:
> >>> The proposal I mailed to the list yesterday is now available here:
> >>> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/OCaml
> >> What's the thinking behind removing *.mli by default?  Even in packages
> >> which are well documented, the *.mli files are the definitive reference
> >> for programmers.  I think they should always be in the -devel subpackage.
> > I replaced it in ocaml-SDL and ocaml-camlimages with ocamldoc generated
> > html references, which seems to be pretty much the same as the
> > individual mli files.
> 
> But I wanna use 'less'!
> 
> Seriously, I don't want to fire up a browser just to check an interface. 
>   Even the text mode browsers have serious UI problems compared to
> 'less /usr/lib/ocaml/3.08.3/list.mli'.
> 
> Is there any reason why *.mli files can't be included in a -devel 
> package?  I'm not talking about the main library package where it would 
> add bloat, but in a package which would only need to be installed by 
> developers.
+1
-- 
Tomas Mraz
No matter how far down the wrong road you've gone, turn back.
                                              Turkish proverb


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]