On 18 March 2010 18:37, Juan Jose Garcia-Ripoll <juanjose.garciarip...@googlemail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 11:28 PM, Faré <fah...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> In other words, I think that supporting ASDF is important, but >> ultimately an evolutionary dead-end. > > That is hard to read from the project leaders. I feel rather neutral about > this and please do not feel offended by the following sentence, but if this > is going to be the official position of the project then it should be better > advertised, including perhaps the manual, usual c.l.l forums and maybe the > ASDF prompt itself. > No, this is not an official position as an "ASDF project leader". Moreover, I do intend to resign from active ASDF development after ASDF 2 is released, and focus my CL build hacking activity wholly on XCVB.
Inasmuch as there is an "official position" of "ASDF project leaders" as such, it is that ASDF will be the best ASDF it can be, and that XCVB is not on the radar. (Unofficially, we tailored our source-registry API so it may be directly reused by XCVB.) [ François-René ÐVB Rideau | Reflection&Cybernethics | http://fare.tunes.org ] If it doesn't work right, we can always try something else. — John McCarthy _______________________________________________ asdf-devel mailing list asdf-devel@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/asdf-devel
