[bug#49203] [PATCH 1/2] gnu: Add ocaml-uri-sexp.

[Julien Lepiller <julien@lepiller.eu>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1849 bytes --]

Hi, what matters is that patches focus on one thing, and one one. I agree with Adu here, we should make sure uri anl uri-sexp are the same version. If you really don't want to do that in this series, send it as another series, and make it blocking for this one. I'll try to merge your work this week-end.

Le 25 juin 2021 06:58:06 GMT-04:00, Xinglu Chen <public@yoctocell.xyz> a écrit :
>On Fri, Jun 25 2021, Adu O'Hara wrote:
>
>> Xinglu Chen <public@yoctocell.xyz> writes:
>>
>>>> True, what I was suggesting would add another patch to the 
>>>> series 
>>>> and mix up intentions of the series.
>>>
>>> Sorry, I don’t get what you are trying to say here.
>>>
>>>> Still, I'd suggest for ocaml-uri-sexp to inherit from
>>>> ocaml-uri. Otherwise we have them at two different versions.
>>>
>>> I think it makes more sense to do that in a separate series 
>>> since
>>> updating ‘ocaml-uri’ isn’t really related to adding 
>>> ‘ocaml-cohttp’.
>>
>> Sorry for being unclear. Here's what I mean:
>>
>> (define-public ocaml-uri-sexp
>>   (package
>>     (inherit ocaml-uri)
>>     (name "ocaml-uri-sexp")
>>     (arguments
>>      `(#:package "uri-sexp"
>>        #:test-target "."))
>>     (propagated-inputs
>>       `(("ocaml-uri" ,ocaml-uri)
>>         ("ocaml-ppx-sexp-conv" ,ocaml-ppx-sexp-conv)
>>         ("ocaml-sexplib0" ,ocaml-sexplib0)))
>>     (native-inputs `(("ocaml-ounit" ,ocaml-ounit)))))
>>
>> Then when `ocaml-uri` eventually gets updated `ocaml-uri` and 
>> `ocaml-uri-sexp` will be at same version.
>
>But ‘ocaml-uri’ would first have to be updated to the latest version,
>which I think is out of scope of this series.
>
>Once this series gets merged, I think it would be great to update
>‘ocaml-uri’, and then make ‘ocaml-uri-sexp’ inherit from it.
>
>WDYT?

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2614 bytes --]