timo.my...@bittivirhe.fi (Timo Myyrä) writes: > What would be the value of having library available as OpenBSD package instead > of manually installing or using the Quicklisp package manager? It would make Common Lisp development on the system easier, although I understand if this isn't a priority or something that would be wanted at all.
> In my experience there seems to be breaking changes in each update of > Quicklisp > already. I'd say that if you want to help Common Lisp ecosystem you should > focus > on Quicklisp and help the libraries themselves to work properly on OpenBSD. It's my experience that Quicklisp isn't particularly good software and I'd prefer to avoid it wherever possible. Solene Rapenne <sol...@perso.pw> writes: >There is no point porting libraries if it's not used by a port. You don't believe so even if only to make future ports easier? I'm mostly interested in porting over the most common libraries or those that provide integral functionality with no dependencies themselves.
