At Mon, 3 Jun 2013 08:27:19 -0400, Eli Barzilay wrote: > On Thursday, Matthew Flatt wrote: > > > > You've sketched out the producer side, and I'm not sure of some > > about some of those details. The consumer side seems even more > > complex to me. It seems like the package system would have to keep > > track of which subpackages are installed for a package, provide an > > interface to the user (e.g., in the GUI) for subpackages, and be > > able to update a package with new subpackages --- all while tracking > > dependencies at the level of subpackages. I'm sure it can all be > > done, but I'm not sure how difficult or important it will be > > relative to everything else that still needs to be done, and I'm > > pretty sure it can't all be done right now. > > A very cheap way to do this is to use these sub-package specifications > only for creating packages for distribution. With the obvious > resulting package file names, this means that there is no change at > all that is needed on the consumer side.
I don't understand the suggestion. As a concrete example, can you sketch our how a user installs the "web-server" package without documentation, and how the package manager later knows to upgrade the "web-server" package to include documentation when requested by the user? _________________________ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
