On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 10:22 AM, Greg Hendershott <[email protected]> wrote: > p.s. Even in the case where I _know_ that `foo` will soon be provided > in other-package -- let's say I submit a PR for my handy `foo` to be > added to that package, with a view toward eventually dropping my own > version -- the timing could be tricky. There's a window where a given > user might get the wrong combo of package versions. Using `only-in` or > `prefix-in` allows there to be a bridge period where it can exist in > both packages.
To be clear, I'm talking about a _private_ `foo` that I _don't_ `provide` from my own package. Such as a utility function I made, and it's useful enough that the other package adds it (maybe with my coordination, but maybe not; anyway it could even be a different function that happens to use the same name). If instead I `provide`d `foo` I wouldn't drop it from my package; that would break backward compatibility in the obvious way everyone already understands. ____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
