Some thoughts:
Hackage includes
- making the distinction between program, library. ( plugin ?)
- an expanded set of categories
Cpan includes
- tester reviews
- the dreaded 'other' category
To improve fundability once you get to thousands of
libraries/apps/plugins/frameworks/languages
It's not to
Agreed. Done right, I think there's a PhD in this area for a student who likes
to build and measure systems, including social networking measurements.
Robby and I had a grant that kind of was a seed for this direction: equip
planet libraries with contracts and see how it pressures others to
On Jul 28, 2010, at 12:26 AM, YC wrote:
Other package systems separate the installation step from the import step
Indeed, this is the key design decision separating us from the rest of the
world, and it is not clear whether it was a good decision.
On Jul 27, 2010, at 11:57 PM, Jay McCarthy
YC wrote:
Robby Findler wrote:
I guess the idea is that you'd eliminate the syntactic difference
between a planet-located library and one in the distribution and then
require on some external source to know where the package is located?
Something like that? How would that work?
Hi Robby
On Jul 28, 2010, at 10:03 AM, Dave Gurnell wrote:
Racket's main distribution is big and takes time to compile and install. I'd
personally be in favour of a leaner core distribution with more code in
external packages, so I can choose what I download when I'm only interested
in a single
To add to what Dave said, quick brain dump, hopefully not too unreadable...
Most important for me, I'd like to be able to define multiple (what I'll
call for now) repositories (like Debian apt). So that I can have, for
example, a repository for core official blessed Racket components, one
On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 1:09 AM, Stephen De Gabrielle
stephen.degabrie...@acm.org wrote:
It's not to early to think about an expanded set of categories
One idea is to allow module writers to add to the categories or tags so it
becomes a decentralized process, like how blogs do it these days.
IMHO planet works very well and shouldn't have issue to scale beyond a few
thousand packages if it ever gets to that point. However, to get there I
believe planet first needs one major upgrade - it needs to become location
transparent - meaning that requiring modules in COLLECTS and PLANET look
I recall your proposal from back then, and I will give you my thoughts:
1. a 'remote url' require (which is what Planet boils down to) imposes a
serious cost overhead (for compilation) and a connectivity overhead (suppose I
send you code and you wish to compile it on your netbook while on the
I looked at the message where you link and I didn't see how one would
go about this.
I guess the idea is that you'd eliminate the syntactic difference
between a planet-located library and one in the distribution and then
require on some external source to know where the package is located?
Basically, CPAN is a way of distributing and finding tarballs that
have Perl code it in. The CPAN tool installs these things into a
system or user directory of collects. People have written Perl
modules that overload the module lookup to find and download new CPAN
packages if necessary.
If PLaneT
I think we can and must improve the browsing, searching, rating, etc
parts of PLaneT. There's no shame in copying Hackage, CPAN, etc on
these areas because they are probably very wise in their decisions.
I would like to make DrDr build and test every PLaneT package on some
basis (perhaps when the
Thanks Matthias - please see inline.
On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 7:03 PM, Matthias Felleisen matth...@ccs.neu.eduwrote:
1. a 'remote url' require (which is what Planet boils down to) imposes a
serious cost overhead (for compilation) and a connectivity overhead (suppose
I send you code and you
On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 7:06 PM, Robby Findler
ro...@eecs.northwestern.eduwrote:
I guess the idea is that you'd eliminate the syntactic difference
between a planet-located library and one in the distribution and then
require on some external source to know where the package is located?
On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 8:57 PM, Jay McCarthy jay.mccar...@gmail.comwrote:
If PLaneT worked the same way, it would just be a way of
distributing our .plt files.
This is a great way to think about planet - a distribution mechanism that
can be used to distribute any package.
On Tue, Jul 27,
15 matches
Mail list logo
