That makes sense to me, but perhaps something for others who know better than me to comment on. (And yeah, I'd agree with leaving the git step out).
Robby On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 1:17 PM, Tony Garnock-Jones <[email protected]> wrote: > On 01/02/2015 02:05 PM, Robby Findler wrote: >> I usually do something like that git pull, then 'make base' and then >> 'raco pkg update --all --auto' and then 'raco setup'. >> >> IIUC, these are in flux, however, so maybe there will be a different >> recommendation at some point. > > Would it make sense to have a top-level Makefile target "update" which > does those commands? It'd provide a stable name for them even as they > change. > > .PHONY: update > update: > git pull --ff-only > $(MAKE) base > raco pkg update --all --auto > raco setup > > ... or perhaps without the "git pull", even, depending on how nonuniform > people's git setups tend to be. ____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
