Just out of curiosity: What are your / the teams objections against some
kind of real versioning system that allows to
* specify a version number without creating a new package
* specify dependencies based on minimal version
* keep/pin a package at some particular version (maybe your code
depends on an exact, even buggy behavior)
* keep directory and file names between incompatible versions
without getting banned from solar
What made me also wonder when i read the docs is, why is it allowed to
have packets that have the same directories as the core racket
distribution?
Tobias
On Thu, 08 Nov 2012 14:16:58 +0100, Jay McCarthy <jay.mccar...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Now that the 5.3.1 release is finished, I've just pushed the beta release
of Planet 2 to the Racket core.
I've tried to answer all questions and explain everything about Planet 2
in
the documentation, which I've uploaded a copy of here:
http://faculty.cs.byu.edu/~jay/tmp/20121108-pkgs/planet2/index.html
In particular, it explains what the plan is to go from this beta release
to
the final release.
If you currently have packages on Planet 1, I am excited to help you make
the transition to Planet 2. (I am currently in the process of converting
my
packages.) Please do not hesitate to let me know how I can help.
This represents the third iteration of the design of Planet 2. (The first
was worked on from August 10, 2010 to March 11, 2011. The second in July
2011. The third from August 2011 until now, although coding didn't begin
until December 2011.)
Enjoy,
Jay
p.s. In the implementation, I'm particularly proud of the little language
for defining command-line interfaces with matching functions (see
planet2/main.rkt for a use) and the testing infrastructure that allows
you
to run sequences of shell commands and check their output (see
tests/planet2/tests-install.rkt for a nice example.)
_________________________
Racket Developers list:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
