On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 6:31 PM, Jack Firth <[email protected]> wrote: > I agree with the points about clutter and cumbersome-ness, but I think that > could be fixed with smarter UI and the like on the package server and > package installation process. A simple thing to do would be to just have > multiple packages like `foo`, `foo2`, `foo3` not shown, and only the latest > shown. Renaming the collections and modules from `foo` to `foo2` as part of > the release process is still a complete pain, but that's trickier to get > around. > It would be nice for packages to be able to be declared deprecated (if possible by the author, or else by a third party with review by the repository maintainer) and offer a link to one or many suggested replacement.
—♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org If normative judgments cannot be rational, then science is actually useless. — François Guillaumat -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-dev/CAN7nBXckNeLpBbGrmwjV%3D2GsBJHWHpYSSscJ8j0AZi6xZRyjeA%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
