[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Adding stuff to the core distro (was Re: Infix syntax)
From: |
Daniel Skarda |
Subject: |
Re: Adding stuff to the core distro (was Re: Infix syntax) |
Date: |
17 Oct 2002 03:25:52 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) Emacs/20.7 |
Neil Jerram <address@hidden> writes:
> Daniel> * Read "guile-debugger" thread on guile-devel. Even
> Daniel> developers have not known that there is guile-debugger
> Daniel> package.
>
> In this case, though, the package is still new and possibly not ready
> for the core.
In my opinion it should go to CVS - development HEAD or new branch.
Inclusion would accelerate both acceptance and development of guile-
debugger (IMHO).
> etc. Note that, if this logic is correct, distribution package
> users will always end up seeing lots of small packages, even if
> coming from a single Guile distribution.
Yes, I understand. There are going to be a lot of small packages
anyway. But I still do not see the reason why you also want to scatter and
slow down Guile _development_?
> It might be fun to have a flexible build that allowed to build all
> these pieces from a single distribution, but (i) would we just be
> reinventing the wheel known normally as packages, and (ii) is it
> worth it just for the ./configure && makers?
Single distribution (or one big development pot) means for me as a
developer of Guile application many important things:
* Everything in that distribution works together. Otherwise I have to
figure out which versions work together. I have to know that
guile-foo-x.y depends on guile-x.y, guile-bar-a.b depends on
guile-foo-c.d and guile-e.f. Also I have to remember that guile-x.y does
not have function scm_foo and I have to write many ifdefs. Also I should
not forget that somewhere between 1.2 and 1.6 gh_scm2newstr changed
behaviour ...
* Everything is released together. Suppose that there is brand-new
guile-20.0 and Guile-Foo. Latest stable release of Guile-Foo is for
guile-18.6.1, there is a version of Guile-Foo for guile-20.0, but only
in Guile-Foo CVS.
Now suppose my project depends on Guile and Guile-Foo. If I want to
release new version with new features that rely on features found in
Guile-20.0, I have to wait until Guile-Foo maintainer release new
Guile-Foo.
* Everything that is "inside" will not accidentally orphanate. Older
package gets more "deprecated" warnings than newer package. It would be
pity to lost some package just because nobody renamed scm_foo to
scm_c_foo ...
May be we should distinguish Guile (as in libguile or guile-core) and GUILE
as a development platform (all guile-foo packages together). Maybe what I am
calling for is not "one big Guile" (Guile == GUILE), but more organised GUILE
- some policy for GUILE development.
My proposal:
* release often, release regularly
* release together. Think GNOME - there are many big packages, but they
form together one development platform. You develop for GNOME (or
GNOME2), not for libfoo-x.y, libbar-a.b,....
Do you think that Guile != GUILE?
Is GUILE necessary or is it just my crazy dream?
What do you see as the most needed GUILE policy?
Thank you for your opinions,
0.
- Re: Adding stuff to the core distro (was Re: Infix syntax), (continued)
- Re: Adding stuff to the core distro (was Re: Infix syntax), Rob Browning, 2002/10/10
- Re: Adding stuff to the core distro (was Re: Infix syntax), Clinton Ebadi, 2002/10/10
- Re: Adding stuff to the core distro (was Re: Infix syntax), Lynn Winebarger, 2002/10/10
- Proposal for scope of core distro, Neil Jerram, 2002/10/13
- Re: Adding stuff to the core distro (was Re: Infix syntax), Daniel Skarda, 2002/10/18
- Re: Adding stuff to the core distro (was Re: Infix syntax), Lynn Winebarger, 2002/10/19
- Re: Adding stuff to the core distro (was Re: Infix syntax), Daniel Skarda, 2002/10/20
- Re: Adding stuff to the core distro (was Re: Infix syntax), Bill Gribble, 2002/10/10
- Re: Adding stuff to the core distro (was Re: Infix syntax), Daniel Skarda, 2002/10/19
- Re: Adding stuff to the core distro (was Re: Infix syntax), Neil Jerram, 2002/10/13
- Re: Adding stuff to the core distro (was Re: Infix syntax),
Daniel Skarda <=
- Re: Adding stuff to the core distro (was Re: Infix syntax), Neil Jerram, 2002/10/19
- Re: Adding stuff to the core distro (was Re: Infix syntax), Daniel Skarda, 2002/10/10
- Re: Adding stuff to the core distro (was Re: Infix syntax), Neil Jerram, 2002/10/13
- Re: Adding stuff to the core distro (was Re: Infix syntax), Daniel Skarda, 2002/10/18
- Re: Adding stuff to the core distro (was Re: Infix syntax), tomas, 2002/10/19
- Re: Adding stuff to the core distro (was Re: Infix syntax), Daniel Skarda, 2002/10/20
- Re: Adding stuff to the core distro (was Re: Infix syntax), tomas, 2002/10/21
- Re: Adding stuff to the core distro (was Re: Infix syntax), Neil Jerram, 2002/10/21
- Re: Adding stuff to the core distro (was Re: Infix syntax), Christopher Cramer, 2002/10/19
- Re: Adding stuff to the core distro (was Re: Infix syntax), Daniel Skarda, 2002/10/20