Comment by Ygg2
3 months ago
From what I've seen. The Odin has three package collections: `base`, `core` and `vendor`.
`base` is intrinsically necessary to port Odin. `core` seems to be its standard library, your `libc`, `xml`, etc.
And `vendor` is everything else. So you basically get the Python's '`core` is where packages go to die' approach iff they take backwards compatibility seriously. Otherwise, they have breaking changes mid-language version change.
EDIT: Package collections not packages per gingerBill.
Those are library/package collections which contain multiple different packages, not the packages themselves.
And we will take backwards compatibility seriously when we hit 1.0, and only "break" on major versions.
> And we will take backwards compatibility seriously when we hit 1.0, and only "break" on major versions.
I'm talking about post 1.0 language choices:
- Choose backwards compatibility. Packages frozen in time, you get "Packages go to std to die." - Choose to break backwards compatibility. The ecosystem is split, some choose to go Odin 2 some are Odin 3.
I already know all that, that's why we are being very conservative and slow when it comes to figuring out what is meant to be in 1.0.
5 replies →
So they are trying the Linux distribution model of packages, right? (Compare `vendor` with, say, Ubuntu's `universe`.)