# Ppxlib dev meetings **URL:** \ **Category:** Community\ **Tags:** ppxlib, ppx, dev-meetings, announce\ **Created:** [June 20, 2023, 10:25am UTC](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/ppxlib-dev-meetings/12441 "2023-06-20T10:25:38Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![pitag](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discuss.ocaml.org/pitag/32/3489_2.png) [@pitag](https://discuss.ocaml.org/u/pitag)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2023, 10:25am UTC](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/ppxlib-dev-meetings/12441/1 "2023-06-20T10:25:38Z")
Hello everyone, Similarly to [what the Eio team is doing](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/eio-developer-meetings/12207), we’re now also making the Ppxlib dev meetings public. Ppxlib’s maintenance is mainly passive, so the meetings are monthly and tend to be small. Still, anyone who’s interested is invited to join! In general, our meetings are **every third Tuesday of the month at 6pm CET** (_third_ because three is the smallest prime number right after two 😛 ). However, we sometimes adapt the time to make sure that both @panglesd and I can join. This month, the meeting will be the day after tomorrow, i.e. on Thursday, June 22nd at 4pm CET. I’ll post a link to that meeting in this thread on Thursday. Some things that are on the agenda for this month’s meeting are: - Recap of `ocaml.5.1.0` support - What have been the main pain points for Ppxlib wrt the Parsetree change on value binding constraints? - How can we handle those kinds of Parsetree changes better in the future? - Upcoming `ocaml.5.1.0` feature support - What structure do we want for the `Ast_builder`/`Ast_pattern` unstable submodules? - When are we going to start the creation of the current PPX universe? - How we will detect the potential semantic breakages of PPXs after the Parsetree bump. - `trunk`-support - Let’s move `trunk-support` over to `main`! - Possibly: Astlib If you’d like to discuss anything else, you can answer here on the thread and we’ll add it to the agenda. ---
**Author:** ![pitag](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discuss.ocaml.org/pitag/32/3489_2.png) [@pitag](https://discuss.ocaml.org/u/pitag)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2023, 10:26am UTC](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/ppxlib-dev-meetings/12441/2 "2023-06-22T10:26:59Z")
Here’s the link to the meeting this afternoon (at 4pm CET): [meet.google.com/yxw-ejnu-cju](http://meet.google.com/yxw-ejnu-cju) ---
**Author:** ![pitag](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discuss.ocaml.org/pitag/32/3489_2.png) [@pitag](https://discuss.ocaml.org/u/pitag)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2023, 7:34pm UTC](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/ppxlib-dev-meetings/12441/3 "2023-06-22T19:34:30Z")
As a follow-up: It has been @panglesd, @Burnley and me in the meeting today. So nobody “from outside” has joined. Still, we think it’s good that the decision not to participate is taken by each community member, not by us. So we’ll keep the meetings open. You can [add the monthly event to your Google calendar](https://calendar.google.com/calendar/event?action=TEMPLATE&tmeid=Y2gyYmZpcWt0cWI2dGgzNGFqczhxZWhyZHBfMjAyMzA2MjBUMTYwMDAwWiBjXzlhMWJiOWVlYmQzNjM5YTJkYjgyNjhjMzZhMjZkZjViMmQ4N2VmY2JhZjM5YTJjMGEyZDE0YzlhY2JkMTJlNmZAZw&tmsrc=c_9a1bb9eebd3639a2db8268c36a26df5b2d87efcbaf39a2c0a2d14c9acbd12e6f%40group.calendar.google.com&scp=ALL), and we will try to send a notification here on discuss each month. And here are today’s meeting notes: [Dev meeting 22 06 2023 · ocaml-ppx/ppxlib Wiki · GitHub](https://github.com/ocaml-ppx/ppxlib/wiki/Dev-meeting-22-06-2023) ---
**Author:** ![pitag](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discuss.ocaml.org/pitag/32/3489_2.png) [@pitag](https://discuss.ocaml.org/u/pitag)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2023, 12:09pm UTC](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/ppxlib-dev-meetings/12441/4 "2023-07-17T12:09:30Z")
Hello 👋 The `ppxlib` July dev meeting is tomorrow **Tue, July 18th, at 6pm CET**. Here’s what’s on our agenda so far: - OMP: - Do we “stop maintaining it” or do we add OCaml 5.1 support? - Ppxlib - OCaml `trunk` compat: - Currently, there’s no compatibility due to an ocaml-compiler-libs build problem. Who’s affected? - Ppxlib’s general maintenance: - OCaml 5.1 support: The bug fix around generative functor applications is being worked on. - We’re not in a hurry to bump the AST this time. - A few pending reviews on Ppxlib. What’s the best strategy for reviews / reacting to non-urgent issues now that we’re in “minimal maintenance mode”? - Is there anything else that will come up before September? - OCaml workshop 2023: - Recap on why our talk proposal on Ppxlib has been rejected. - Outreachy internship on Ppxlib: - How is it going? ❤ We’re always happy to add things, if anyone is interested in anything else. _Edit:_ I forgot to add the meeting link. It’s the same as last time: [https://meet.google.com/yxw-ejnu-cju](https://meet.google.com/yxw-ejnu-cju) ---
**Author:** ![pitag](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discuss.ocaml.org/pitag/32/3489_2.png) [@pitag](https://discuss.ocaml.org/u/pitag)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2023, 6:05pm UTC](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/ppxlib-dev-meetings/12441/5 "2023-07-18T18:05:49Z")
Here are the meeting notes of the July meeting: [Dev meeting 18 07 2023 · ocaml-ppx/ppxlib Wiki · GitHub](https://github.com/ocaml-ppx/ppxlib/wiki/Dev-meeting-18-07-2023) As a heads-up: There won’t be a meeting in August, so the next one will be in September. Have a nice summer/winter/other season everyone! 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![pitag](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discuss.ocaml.org/pitag/32/3489_2.png) [@pitag](https://discuss.ocaml.org/u/pitag)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2023, 10:59am UTC](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/ppxlib-dev-meetings/12441/6 "2023-09-19T10:59:26Z")
Hello 👋 We’re having the monthly dev meeting today at 6pm CEST. It’s the same meeting link as always: [https://meet.google.com/yxw-ejnu-cju](https://meet.google.com/yxw-ejnu-cju) and here’s our agenda so far: - 0.31.0 release: - OCaml `trunk` support: - Bump OCamlformat: - Deprecation of OMP (`ocaml-migrate-parsetree`) ---
**Author:** ![pitag](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discuss.ocaml.org/pitag/32/3489_2.png) [@pitag](https://discuss.ocaml.org/u/pitag)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2023, 6:41pm UTC](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/ppxlib-dev-meetings/12441/7 "2023-09-19T18:41:41Z")
Here’re today’s meeting notes: [Dev meeting 19 09 2023 · ocaml-ppx/ppxlib Wiki · GitHub](https://github.com/ocaml-ppx/ppxlib/wiki/Dev-meeting-19-09-2023). It has been @panglesd , @ceastlund, @Burnley and me in the meeting. Also, as a side-note: If anyone thinks that two posts about the Ppxlib meetings per month -one with the agenda and the meeting link and one with the link to the notes- is too much spamming, do let me know. ---
**Author:** ![pitag](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discuss.ocaml.org/pitag/32/3489_2.png) [@pitag](https://discuss.ocaml.org/u/pitag)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2023, 10:02am UTC](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/ppxlib-dev-meetings/12441/8 "2023-10-17T10:02:11Z")
The October ppxlib meeting is today. We only have a short agenda for this month so far: Agenda: - State of OMP deprecation. - [[RFC] Deprecating ocaml-migrate-parsetree in favor of Ppxlib, also as a Platform tool](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/rfc-deprecating-ocaml-migrate-parsetree-in-favor-of-ppxlib-also-as-a-platform-tool/13240) - New compiler parsetree changes: - [Add parameter location information to parsetree/typedtree by ncik-roberts · Pull Request #12391 · ocaml/ocaml · GitHub](https://github.com/ocaml/ocaml/pull/12391) - [parsing: Attach a location to the RHS of Ptyp\_alias by Julow · Pull Request #12639 · ocaml/ocaml · GitHub](https://github.com/ocaml/ocaml/pull/12639) - others? - Is it viable to try to stay in sync with OCaml `trunk`? - Open PRs on ppxlib. - (If there’s a lot of time left and nobody is in a hurry, we might also chat about ppxlib in general and meta-programming approaches in other languages.) Like always, anyone is invited to join: [https://meet.google.com/yxw-ejnu-cju](https://meet.google.com/yxw-ejnu-cju) . It’s starts 2023-10-17T16:00:00Z. ---
**Author:** ![pitag](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discuss.ocaml.org/pitag/32/3489_2.png) [@pitag](https://discuss.ocaml.org/u/pitag)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2023, 6:34pm UTC](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/ppxlib-dev-meetings/12441/9 "2023-10-17T18:34:30Z")
@octachron has come to the ppxlib dev meeting today, which has been a very nice surprise. It’s nice to discuss intersections between ppxlib and the compiler together with compiler maintainers. Thanks, @octachron! So it has been @panglesd, @octachron and me in the meeting. Here are the meeting notes: [Dev meeting 19 09 2023 · ocaml-ppx/ppxlib Wiki · GitHub](https://github.com/ocaml-ppx/ppxlib/wiki/Dev-meeting-19-09-2023). ---
**Author:** ![pitag](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discuss.ocaml.org/pitag/32/3489_2.png) [@pitag](https://discuss.ocaml.org/u/pitag)\ **Post date:** [November 20, 2023, 7:27pm UTC](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/ppxlib-dev-meetings/12441/10 "2023-11-20T19:27:03Z")
Hello 🙂 Tomorrow, concretely 2023-11-21T17:00:00Z, is our monthly ppxlib dev meeting. Here’s what we currently have on the agenda: - Deprecation of `Caml` in ppxlib and how breaking that change is. - `Ast_builder` and `Ast_pattern` have a restricted API wrt attributes. `Ast_helper` seemed more flexible wrt attributes. Why? (see [Attributes in `Ast_builder.Default` and `Ast_pattern` · Issue #458 · ocaml-ppx/ppxlib · GitHub](https://github.com/ocaml-ppx/ppxlib/issues/458) and [Best Practices for Attributes in PPX](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/best-practices-for-attributes-in-ppx/13400)) - We’re stopping the efforts to manually keep ppxlib compatible with `trunk`. - Ppxlib driver performance - Current state of `ppx_deriving` We’re making it a zoom meeting this time, so the meeting link is different than usual. Here it is: [Launch Meeting - Zoom](https://us06web.zoom.us/j/83514378641?pwd=zLEAAINxaKbm6Afk4Sh95zc2poUfcB.1) ---
**Author:** ![pitag](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discuss.ocaml.org/pitag/32/3489_2.png) [@pitag](https://discuss.ocaml.org/u/pitag)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2023, 4:14pm UTC](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/ppxlib-dev-meetings/12441/11 "2023-11-23T16:14:25Z")
It was a nice and short meeting with @ceastlund and me. Here are the meeting notes: [Dev meeting 21 11 2023 · ocaml-ppx/ppxlib Wiki · GitHub](https://github.com/ocaml-ppx/ppxlib/wiki/Dev-meeting-21-11-2023) ---
**Author:** ![pitag](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discuss.ocaml.org/pitag/32/3489_2.png) [@pitag](https://discuss.ocaml.org/u/pitag)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2023, 4:26pm UTC](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/ppxlib-dev-meetings/12441/12 "2023-12-18T16:26:02Z")
@panglesd and I are going to have a probably quite quick December dev meeting tomorrow, concretely 2023-12-19T17:00:00Z. Here’s our agenda: - 0.32.0 release - Reason for the release: `Attribute` API addition. - Preparation for the release: What else to merge before the release? - Caution for the release: `Caml` → `Stdlib` change. - Compiler [change of AST context format](https://github.com/ocaml/ocaml/pull/12246). - Are there still use cases where the ppx driver is compiled on a different OCaml version than the project is compiled with? In those cases, that compiler change would affect us. - Change of philosophy for `trunk-support` branch. As always, we’re happy to add anything to the agenda! And also, as always, we’re happy if anyone wants to join: [https://meet.google.com/yxw-ejnu-cju](https://meet.google.com/yxw-ejnu-cju) . That’s true in general and particularly if you have insight about the use case question in point 2 from the agenda (also happy to hear about it here on discuss). ---
**Author:** ![pitag](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discuss.ocaml.org/pitag/32/3489_2.png) [@pitag](https://discuss.ocaml.org/u/pitag)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2023, 6:47pm UTC](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/ppxlib-dev-meetings/12441/13 "2023-12-19T18:47:00Z")
Here are today’s meeting notes: [Dev meeting 19 12 2023 · ocaml-ppx/ppxlib Wiki · GitHub](https://github.com/ocaml-ppx/ppxlib/wiki/Dev-meeting-19-12-2023) From next meeting on, I’ll make sure to only send one message on discuss per meeting containing both the agenda and a link to future meeting notes. Have a nice new year everyone! 🎉🙂 ---
**Author:** ![pitag](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discuss.ocaml.org/pitag/32/3489_2.png) [@pitag](https://discuss.ocaml.org/u/pitag)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2024, 11:59am UTC](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/ppxlib-dev-meetings/12441/14 "2024-01-16T11:59:34Z")
Hello everyone, First of all: Happy new year! ✨ We have our monthly ppxlib dev meeting 2024-01-16T17:00:00Z. As always, anyone is welcome to join and to add anything to the agenda: - Getting rid of the `embed-errors=true/false` logic in favor of always embedding errors. - Do we really want that? - What would be the performance impact on builds with PPXs? - Pros and cons of the two different approaches to make ppxlib a weak dependency only: - The [new “experiment”](https://github.com/ocaml/dune/pull/9223) on the dune repo - [`ppx_deriving_inline`](https://ocaml.org/docs/metaprogramming#dropping-ppxs-dependency-with-deriving_inline) - The PRs on error reporting. - The upcoming 0.32.0 release. - Reason for the release: `Attribute` API addition - Caution for the release: `Caml` → `Stdlib` change - Heads-up for the release procedure: We’ll need to write release notes for the [OCaml changelog](https://ocaml.org/changelog) Here’s the meeting link: [https://meet.google.com/yxw-ejnu-cju](https://meet.google.com/yxw-ejnu-cju) As always, after the meeting, we’ll upload the meeting notes to the [repo’s wiki page](https://github.com/ocaml-ppx/ppxlib/wiki). _Update_: The notes are uploaded now: [Dev meeting 16 01 2024 · ocaml-ppx/ppxlib Wiki · GitHub](https://github.com/ocaml-ppx/ppxlib/wiki/Dev-meeting-16-01-2024) . It has been a nice and refreshing meeting now that we have a “new” and more active maintainer (@NathanReb) among us. Apart from Nathan, it has been @panglesd and me. ---
**Author:** ![pitag](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discuss.ocaml.org/pitag/32/3489_2.png) [@pitag](https://discuss.ocaml.org/u/pitag)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2024, 8:01pm UTC](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/ppxlib-dev-meetings/12441/15 "2024-02-15T20:01:32Z")
Hello 👋 I’ve been wondering how this thread is perceived: Do people appreciate that I keep on posting about the monthly dev meetings, first with the agenda and, later on, adding a link to the meeting notes? Or do some perceive it a bit as “spam”? I’ve decided to make a quick poll to try to find that out. If you only have the slightest opinion, please participate. And if you have a stronger and more formed opinion than captured by the poll, you’re of course also very welcome to post with your opinion. E.g. I could imagine things like “A link to the notes every month is good, but please summarize the notes more instead of so many low-level details”. So, here’s the poll: Do you think it’s good to keep on posting about the ppxlib dev-meetings every month? _Poll ([view on site](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/ppxlib-dev-meetings/12441/15))_ ---
**Author:** ![pitag](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discuss.ocaml.org/pitag/32/3489_2.png) [@pitag](https://discuss.ocaml.org/u/pitag)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2024, 9:54pm UTC](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/ppxlib-dev-meetings/12441/16 "2024-02-18T21:54:32Z")
Thanks everyone who has participated in the poll! ❤ It seems like a few people do appreciate the monthly posts, so I/we’ll keep on doing them. If anyone has any comment, just let us know. However, according to the current state of the poll, there’s also one person who finds this thread a bit spammy - and there might be more. I’ll leave the poll open for as long as discuss allows me, so that I can see if that number increases in the future. In the meantime: I’m sorry for the inconvenience for the very few who find the posts spammy! This month, we’re having the meeting on Monday instead of Tuesday, same time as always: 2024-02-19T17:00:00Z . That’s also reflected in the public calendar event. Here’s our agenda. Remember that everyone is welcome to add things: - 5.2 support - Let’s discuss the complicated compiler AST changes for 5.2, among others, if we’re testing their support enough. - Syntactic support for functions with arity \> 1 - Have there been more complicated AST changes this time? - The compiler `ocaml.ppx.context` change - This affects the PPX world iff people want to build their project with a different OCaml version than their PPX is built with. Do we want to keep on supporting that workflow? - Why was the change of `ocaml.ppx.context` in the compiler done in a breaking way? Is it worth for us to discuss that with them? - The ppxlib `~preview` release with 5.2 support - Upcoming things to do on `ppxlib` - When to start with the work to bump ppxlib’s AST to 5.2? - When to start with the upstream `Astlib` efforts? - In case we have time, let’s also discuss how to improve the repo for people to get involved easier (issue labels, contribution guidelines etc) Update: Here are the notes: [Dev meeting 19 02 2024 · ocaml-ppx/ppxlib Wiki · GitHub](https://github.com/ocaml-ppx/ppxlib/wiki/Dev-meeting-19-02-2024) . Apart from @NathanReb, @panglesd and me, also @Octachron and @shonfeder have joined spontaneously 🙏 Thanks, both! The insight into compiler-related details, as well as the nice nudge towards the ppx\_deriving plug-ins, have been very helpful and nice. ---
**Author:** ![gasche](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discuss.ocaml.org/gasche/32/4_2.png) [@gasche](https://discuss.ocaml.org/u/gasche)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2024, 9:00pm UTC](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/ppxlib-dev-meetings/12441/17 "2024-02-20T21:00:35Z")
> Why was the change of `ocaml.ppx.context` in the compiler done in a breaking way? Your post (thanks!) was my first time learning about this. In addition to whatever communication channel y’all have with @octachron, I think that you should not hesitate to open an issue on the compiler when you find such things. There is a chance that we can change things before the 5.2 release to make the ppxlib-side regression go away. I was curious so I looked around, my best guess is that you are referring to ppxlib issue [ocaml.ppx.context's local\_path format changes in OCaml 5.2 · Issue #475 · ocaml-ppx/ppxlib · GitHub](https://github.com/ocaml-ppx/ppxlib/issues/475) , and that it is itself caused by [Add -H flag for transitive dependencies · ocaml/ocaml@01178bb · GitHub](https://github.com/ocaml/ocaml/commit/01178bb60eb337790c597af937ac79419eab241c) which is part of [Add a `-H` flag, second attempt by ccasin · Pull Request #12246 · ocaml/ocaml · GitHub](https://github.com/ocaml/ocaml/pull/12246) . You already pointed to this issue earlier for your December meeting ( [Ppxlib dev meetings - #12 by pitag](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/ppxlib-dev-meetings/12441/12) ), but no one has yet posted a comment on the upstream change to point out that this change affects ppxlib, or (apparently?) considered suggesting that we implement the change differently to avoid the breakage on your end. **Edit** : I posted a summary-of-my-understanding comment on the upstream PR, [Add a `-H` flag, second attempt by ccasin · Pull Request #12246 · ocaml/ocaml · GitHub](https://github.com/ocaml/ocaml/pull/12246#issuecomment-1955111836) . ---
**Author:** ![pitag](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discuss.ocaml.org/pitag/32/3489_2.png) [@pitag](https://discuss.ocaml.org/u/pitag)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2024, 4:59pm UTC](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/ppxlib-dev-meetings/12441/18 "2024-02-21T16:59:09Z")
(I’m just following up on this post and the comments on the PR.) Thanks a lot for following up on this! > I think that you should not hesitate to open an issue on the compiler when you find such things. Thank you! That’s indeed very good to know. From our point of view, there was nothing you did wrong, as there’s no guarantee for formats such as the ppx context one to be kept stable. So our take on it was that we’ll just deal with it. Very nice to know that it was lack of communication from our side and you’d have done the effort to keep it stable for us if we had communicated about it (we’ve known ever since [Add a `-H` flag, second attempt by ccasin · Pull Request #12246 · ocaml/ocaml · GitHub](https://github.com/ocaml/ocaml/pull/12246) was merged). Next time, we’ll communicate, i.e. write an issue! Your guess is exactly right: The new compiler `-H` flag has changed the `ocaml.ppx.context` format by changing its `load_path` field. In a “usual” set-up, where the PPX is built with the same compiler version as the project is built with that’s not a problem. It’s only a problem if the PPX is built with \<5.2 and the project with \>=5.2 or vice-versa. We introduced supporting the workflow of building the PPX with a different compiler than the project in an effort to support bucklescript. Nowadays, we don’t have information if that workflow is still needed by people. PD: > In addition to whatever communication channel y’all have with @octachron That “communication channel” was @octachron coming to our meeting :)) ---
**Author:** ![pitag](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discuss.ocaml.org/pitag/32/3489_2.png) [@pitag](https://discuss.ocaml.org/u/pitag)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2024, 2:44pm UTC](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/ppxlib-dev-meetings/12441/19 "2024-03-21T14:44:06Z")
Hello 👋 ### Last month’s meeting I think as I added the link to last month’s meeting notes by updating the last message, they got lost. In case they’re still of interest: [Dev meeting 19 02 2024 · ocaml-ppx/ppxlib Wiki · GitHub](https://github.com/ocaml-ppx/ppxlib/wiki/Dev-meeting-19-02-2024) . Very nice for us: Apart from NathanReb, panglesd and me, also Octachron and shonfeder joined spontaneously 🙏 Thanks a lot, both! We very very much appreciate every external support and contribution! ### This month’s meeting About this month’s meeting: It’s taking place 2024-03-21T16:00:00Z. The current agenda is: - Recap of the 5.2 support efforts. - What do we want to do next? - Bump the AST? If so, let’s discuss - if we’re going to create a PPX universe to send the patch PRs - or if are we going to make use of the opam-repo CI and only clone the PPXs that we break. - Or retake the work on upstreaming Astlib? - Or something else? There’s enough small improvements to do. - Can we take turns in running these dev-meetings? - If time: How to improve our repo hygiene to make it easier for external contributors to get involved. We’re using zoom today: > **[Join our Cloud HD Video Meeting](https://us06web.zoom.us/j/85326264888?pwd=qGw0pXNNkKgigbvp0dGszVV11WM6BW.1)** > > Zoom is the leader in modern enterprise cloud communications. Meeting ID: 853 2626 4888 Passcode: 501648 _Update:_ Here are the quickly written notes of this month’s meeting [Dev meeting 22 03 2024 · ocaml-ppx/ppxlib Wiki · GitHub](https://github.com/ocaml-ppx/ppxlib/wiki/Dev-meeting-22-03-2024) . Very nice: @ncik-roberts who implemented the function arity change in the compiler, joined the meeting. Thanks for joining! ---
**Author:** ![NathanReb](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discuss.ocaml.org/nathanreb/32/1259_2.png) [@NathanReb](https://discuss.ocaml.org/u/NathanReb)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2024, 9:00pm UTC](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/ppxlib-dev-meetings/12441/20 "2024-04-15T21:00:40Z")
April’s meeting is scheduled tomorrow, 6PM CET. Here’s the meeting’s agenda: - How to deal with the release of 5.2 support - Can we safely release it ahead of the compiler? - Should we already merge `trunk-support` into `main`? - Updating `trunk-support` for 5.3 - The `trunk-support` branch was lagging behind before our recent update following the 5.2.0~alpha releases of the compiler. Now is a good time to document and improve how we maintain this branch. - We lack documentation on how to add support for a new compiler version, that’s something we might want to look into when adding support for the latest trunk. - It seems that @hhugo already has a branch with 5.3 support, probably worth looking into this. - Are we bumping the internal AST to 5.2 - A quick update on `ppx_deriving` - 6.0.0 release ongoing with standard derivers ported to ppxlib - `ppx_deriving_yojson` should be migrated as well - We should start deprecating the ppx\_deriving API for writing derivers as a next step - Refactoring the driver code that builds the list of AST transforms - Working on the dune driver mode brought to light that this part of the driver could use some simplification and clarification [Next page](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/ppxlib-dev-meetings/12441.md?page=2)