[racket-dev] We just had our first totally clean build in DrDr in a long time
We should get one of those signs like in factories: X days accident free. -- Jay McCarthy j...@cs.byu.edu Assistant Professor / Brigham Young University http://faculty.cs.byu.edu/~jay The glory of God is Intelligence - DC 93 _ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
Re: [racket-dev] We just had our first totally clean build in DrDr in a long time
You could make a Super 8 film then. On Dec 8, 2012, at 3:45 PM, Jay McCarthy wrote: We should get one of those signs like in factories: X days accident free. -- Jay McCarthy j...@cs.byu.edu Assistant Professor / Brigham Young University http://faculty.cs.byu.edu/~jay The glory of God is Intelligence - DC 93 _ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev _ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
Re: [racket-dev] We just had our first totally clean build in DrDr in a long time
Cool! Robby On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 2:45 PM, Jay McCarthy jay.mccar...@gmail.com wrote: We should get one of those signs like in factories: X days accident free. -- Jay McCarthy j...@cs.byu.edu Assistant Professor / Brigham Young University http://faculty.cs.byu.edu/~jay The glory of God is Intelligence - DC 93 _ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev _ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
Re: [racket-dev] We just had our first totally clean build in DrDr in a long time
Is a clean build an accident? If so, we've gone back down to 0. On 12/08/2012 01:45 PM, Jay McCarthy wrote: We should get one of those signs like in factories: X days accident free. -- Jay McCarthy j...@cs.byu.edu mailto:j...@cs.byu.edu Assistant Professor / Brigham Young University http://faculty.cs.byu.edu/~jay The glory of God is Intelligence - DC 93 _ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev _ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
Re: [racket-dev] Planet 2 Beta Release
On Wednesday, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote: Given that context, maybe the right thing here is (a) installation- specific packages by default and (b) a way to *upgrade* an existing installation when installing. That might be as simple as automatically running 'raco pkg migrate', but I think making it part of the installation step would make life easier for people, and perhaps an upgrade could avoid duplicating files. I think that this is exactly what Matthew was talking about. One tricky bit here is to know which packages were installed for which level. If *you* installed some packages, then the next time you *run* (not install) an updated racket version you'd be asked if you want to do the migration. But if some package was installed as part of the racket tree (not user specific) then the same question would apply when a new version gets installed. -- ((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x))) Eli Barzilay: http://barzilay.org/ Maze is Life! _ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
Re: [racket-dev] Planet 2 Beta Release
On Dec 8, 2012 10:14 PM, Eli Barzilay e...@barzilay.org wrote: On Wednesday, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote: Given that context, maybe the right thing here is (a) installation- specific packages by default and (b) a way to *upgrade* an existing installation when installing. That might be as simple as automatically running 'raco pkg migrate', but I think making it part of the installation step would make life easier for people, and perhaps an upgrade could avoid duplicating files. I think that this is exactly what Matthew was talking about. One tricky bit here is to know which packages were installed for which level. If *you* installed some packages, then the next time you *run* (not install) an updated racket version you'd be asked if you want to do the migration. But if some package was installed as part of the racket tree (not user specific) then the same question would apply when a new version gets installed. Why would this wait for the first run for any packages? One other thing that I think is important in a migration path is keeping any modification made to the source of the packages that are already installed. Sam _ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
Re: [racket-dev] Planet 2 Beta Release
Just now, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote: On Dec 8, 2012 10:14 PM, Eli Barzilay e...@barzilay.org wrote: I think that this is exactly what Matthew was talking about. One tricky bit here is to know which packages were installed for which level. If *you* installed some packages, then the next time you *run* (not install) an updated racket version you'd be asked if you want to do the migration. But if some package was installed as part of the racket tree (not user specific) then the same question would apply when a new version gets installed. Why would this wait for the first run for any packages? As usual, think about a lab with a central sysadmin-made racket installation. It's impossible to crawl over all users and change stuff in their home directory when the sysadmin upgrades the installation. Now carry this over to OSX and Windows, and it's the same thing. (And even Windows is moving toward a more strict separation between the administrator and plain users.) The thing that makes it somewhat easier there is that the interaction tends to be a single user that plays both roles. So either the user installed some packages for everyone and the upgrade will update those at installation time, or the user installed things for himself, and the upgrade will happen when the new version runs -- usually just after the new installation. One other thing that I think is important in a migration path is keeping any modification made to the source of the packages that are already installed. Yeah -- and IIUC, the difference between the two installations is where the packages get installed is where the compiled files are, so the sources are the same. At least I *hope* that that's how it is, otherwise it's back to the whole planet cache things, which IMO was a major mistake. -- ((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x))) Eli Barzilay: http://barzilay.org/ Maze is Life! _ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
Re: [racket-dev] Planet 2 Beta Release
On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 8:29 PM, Eli Barzilay e...@barzilay.org wrote: One other thing that I think is important in a migration path is keeping any modification made to the source of the packages that are already installed. Yeah -- and IIUC, the difference between the two installations is where the packages get installed is where the compiled files are, so the sources are the same. At least I *hope* that that's how it is, otherwise it's back to the whole planet cache things, which IMO was a major mistake. They are in the same place. However, I thought the whole premise of this proposed behavior is that the package won't work in the new version of Racket, so certainly the package system can't be responsible for doing a merge your local changes and whatever the updated version of the package needs. Jay -- Jay McCarthy j...@cs.byu.edu Assistant Professor / Brigham Young University http://faculty.cs.byu.edu/~jay The glory of God is Intelligence - DC 93 _ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
Re: [racket-dev] Planet 2 Beta Release
30 minutes ago, Jay McCarthy wrote: On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 8:29 PM, Eli Barzilay e...@barzilay.org wrote: One other thing that I think is important in a migration path is keeping any modification made to the source of the packages that are already installed. Yeah -- and IIUC, the difference between the two installations is where the packages get installed is where the compiled files are, so the sources are the same. At least I *hope* that that's how it is, otherwise it's back to the whole planet cache things, which IMO was a major mistake. They are in the same place. However, I thought the whole premise of this proposed behavior is that the package won't work in the new version of Racket, so certainly the package system can't be responsible for doing a merge your local changes and whatever the updated version of the package needs. I'm not following that -- the compiled files and the sources are in the same place? If so then it makes the whole migration thing kind of impossible with local changes, no? (And I wasn't thinking about merging, just reusing the same sources.) -- ((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x))) Eli Barzilay: http://barzilay.org/ Maze is Life! _ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
