At Mon, 3 Jun 2013 10:36:51 -0400, Eli Barzilay wrote: > (BTW, a possible source of confusion: I'm assuming that distribution > must be done via archives and not via repository specs, since there > should be some way to put the compiled files in there.
I don't think that's the right assumption. We want it to have packages that combine source with built entities, but I don't think we want to require it. Requiring it would break the way GitHub repositories are meant to be used as packages. > You've > mentioned at some point a "binary catalog" which seems unnecessary to > me, but maybe there's something I don't get here.) Yes, binary packages are another way to address the underlying issue. I'm going to try to synthesize the progress and discussion so far in a new message, and hopefully I'll managed to explain binary packages this time around. _________________________ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
