Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Use opam repo instead of submodules #14

Closed
objmagic opened this issue Feb 9, 2018 · 12 comments
Closed

Use opam repo instead of submodules #14

objmagic opened this issue Feb 9, 2018 · 12 comments
Labels

Comments

@objmagic
Copy link
Contributor

objmagic commented Feb 9, 2018

See: https://github.com/ocamllabs/advanced-fp-repo

A customized repo can be set up to have your customized camlpdf, otfm, and ucorelib there.

I can send some pull requests when I'm free.

@nekketsuuu
Copy link
Contributor

@gfngfn Will you plan to send pull requests of your custom packages? If not, I also think creating a opam repo is a good idea to divide the dependency problem and to simplify the build process. But it needs a new official git repo, so now I can't contribute to this.

cf.: https://opam.ocaml.org/doc/Usage.html#opam-repo

@objmagic
Copy link
Contributor Author

@nekketsuuu you can create a opam repo, test it, and transfer ownership back to gfn on GitHub. Or better, we can set up an organization on GitHub.

@nekketsuuu
Copy link
Contributor

@objmagic Thanks! I don't know we can transfer repo's ownership.

@nekketsuuu
Copy link
Contributor

I tried to set up a opam repo for SATySFi. It seems to be working well :) https://github.com/nekketsuuu/satysfi-external-repo

@nekketsuuu
Copy link
Contributor

@gfngfn Which do you think is better, to transfer ownership or to make an organization?

@qnighy
Copy link
Contributor

qnighy commented Mar 13, 2018

So in my understanding, the possible options are:

  1. Keep status quo.
  2. Create a custom opam repo.
  3. Try to push everything back to the upstreams, then use the official package.

We can also try to push some of the patches back to the upstreams, while choosing 1 and 2.

@gfngfn which option do you think is ideal? My idea is that if these patches are highly SATySFi-specific, then 2 is suitable. I'm willing to help you either way.

@gfngfn
Copy link
Owner

gfngfn commented Mar 13, 2018

Thank you for the suggestion, and I’m terribly sorry for the late response.

For now, I would not like to send gfngfn/otfm:master to dbuenzli/otfm as a pull request, since the development of gfngfn/otfm largely breaks the backward compatibility with dbuenzli/otfm. If willing to do so, it seems necessary to have a profound discussion and to reach a genuine consensus with dbuenzli-san.

@nekketsuuu
Copy link
Contributor

I transferred the ownership of nekketsuuu/satysfi-external-repo to gfngfn.

@nekketsuuu
Copy link
Contributor

@objmagic #62 is merged thanks to gfn-san :-)

@gfngfn
Copy link
Owner

gfngfn commented Apr 2, 2018

Thank you very much for introducing external opam repositories (and am very sorry for the late response).

@objmagic
Copy link
Contributor Author

objmagic commented Apr 2, 2018 via email

@objmagic
Copy link
Contributor Author

objmagic commented Apr 2, 2018

closed via #62

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants