{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/mirage/ocaml-cohttp/issues/238","repository_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/mirage/ocaml-cohttp","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/mirage/ocaml-cohttp/issues/238/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/mirage/ocaml-cohttp/issues/238/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/mirage/ocaml-cohttp/issues/238/events","html_url":"https://github.com/mirage/ocaml-cohttp/issues/238","id":55295843,"number":238,"title":"split into multiple opam packages","user":{"login":"avsm","id":53164,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/53164?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/avsm","html_url":"https://github.com/avsm","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/avsm/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/avsm/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/avsm/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/avsm/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/avsm/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/avsm/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/avsm/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/avsm/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/avsm/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"milestone":null,"comments":10,"created_at":"2015-01-23T15:42:13Z","updated_at":"2016-05-02T17:38:51Z","closed_at":null,"body":"We could have virtual packages for the depopts (e.g. `cohttp-lwt`) as a shim before a more complete split.  Via @yminsky:\r\n\r\n> I'm curious why the cohttp package works as it does.  It seems like it\r\n> would be cleaner to break something like cohttp into three packages:\r\n> cohttp-base, cohttp-lwt, and cohttp-async.  As it is, the rebuilding\r\n> of cohttp when you add a new dep seems suboptimal, since it causes\r\n> packages to be removed and re-added that aren't really required.\r\n\r\nOne annoying problem is that we can't use the OPAM 1.2 pinning workflow with multiple packages in one repository.  @AltGr @samoht, reckon it's worth making an upstream OPAM bug to think about this feature?  It would make having multiple OPAM packages in git subdirectories a lot easier."},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/mirage/ocaml-cohttp/issues/comments/216305530","html_url":"https://github.com/mirage/ocaml-cohttp/issues/238#issuecomment-216305530","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/mirage/ocaml-cohttp/issues/238","id":216305530,"user":{"login":"rgrinberg","id":139003,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/139003?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/rgrinberg","html_url":"https://github.com/rgrinberg","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/rgrinberg/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/rgrinberg/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/rgrinberg/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/rgrinberg/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/rgrinberg/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/rgrinberg/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/rgrinberg/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/rgrinberg/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/rgrinberg/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2016-05-02T17:38:51Z","updated_at":"2016-05-02T17:38:51Z","body":"@samoht @avsm for a first cut, I can do pretty much what conduit is doing. Have sub packages that are nothing more than just `$ ocamlfind query` calls."}}