Comment 7 for bug 620579

On 8/19/10, Faré <email address hidden> wrote:
> I started the discussion on asdf-devel already.
> http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/asdf-devel
> http://common-lisp.net/pipermail/asdf-devel/2010-August/001566.html

thanks.
since the list is still not available on gmane.org, I am replying here.

the summary of my position is:

1. The footprint of asdf (3 pakages) is ridiculous. one package per
facility is perfectly enough for all other - much larger! - projects,
e.g., gsll, it should be eough for asdf.

2. Either asdf is stable and forward compatible (and then the users
are never expected to fetch their own versions and can always rely on
whatever the implementation ships) or asdf needs to be hot-swappable
(i.e., the users are supposed to run 'git pull' all the time and use
the latest and greatest asdf). Not both.

--
Sam Steingold <http://sds.podval.org>