30 minutes ago, Jay McCarthy wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 8:29 PM, Eli Barzilay <e...@barzilay.org> wrote:
>
> > One other thing that I think is important in a migration path is
> > keeping any modification made to the source of the packages that are
> > already installed.
>
> Yeah -- and IIUC, the difference between the two installations is
> where the packages get installed is where the compiled files are, so
> the sources are the same. At least I *hope* that that's how it is,
> otherwise it's back to the whole planet "cache" things, which IMO was
> a major mistake.
>
> They are in the same place. However, I thought the whole premise of
> this proposed behavior is that the package won't work in the new
> version of Racket, so certainly the package system can't be
> responsible for doing a merge your local changes and whatever the
> updated version of the package needs.
I'm not following that -- the compiled files and the sources are in
the same place? If so then it makes the whole migration thing kind of
impossible with local changes, no? (And I wasn't thinking about
merging, just reusing the same sources.)
--
((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x))) Eli Barzilay:
http://barzilay.org/ Maze is Life!
_________________________
Racket Developers list:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
