> If info.rkt does not exist, it creates it and gives the 'collection-name > > the name of the package by default. > > That doesn't seem like a good idea to me. As you've noted, there can be > problems with writing extra files. The collection name could be instead > computed in `pkg-single-collection', which would treat the absence of > an "info.rkt" to mean single-collection mode, right? > > > Some calls to `pkg-single-collection' would need to change to pass in > a package name to use instead of the `dir' name, since the `dir' > argument is sometimes a temporary directory that is used to stage a > package. That's an easy change. >
If the original package/directory name can be retrieved at any time, then yes, it's a much better idea (actually I had started this way, but didn't know how to retrieve the name at any time). Laurent
_________________________ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
