Compatibility with Merlin 503 preview

[voodoos]

No description provided.

[rgrinberg]

This seems wrong. Don't we need a lower bound based on the stdlib/language features we're using?

[voodoos]

Yes, but I would expect that lower-bound to coincides with the one imposed by the compatible merlin-lib versions. Not specifying the lower-bound on OCaml here means Opam CI will fail if we don't respect that invariant.

I don't mind adding it back of course if that's a better practice.

For the record: I plan to do releases of Merlin and LSP for 5.2 next week, and for 5.3 around the time of the final release.

[rgrinberg]

I think it makes sense to always specify direct deps as precisely as possible and not to rely on transitive deps. For example, what if we start using a new language feature or a new function. Our lower bound might be higher than merlin's? Conversely, what if merlin expands its support to older versions of OCaml that we can't build against?

[voodoos]

Our lower bound might be higher than merlin

This is something we want to avoid for releases of LSP to be compatible with as many versions as merlin-lib as possible (which is only 5.2 and 5.3 these days anyway).

I think it makes sense to always specify direct deps as precisely as possible and not to rely on transitive deps.

Works for me, I will make the change.