Re: Clojure Box (was Working combination of .emacs, Aquamacs, swank-clojure, clojure-mode?)

2008-11-21 Thread Shawn Hoover
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 7:57 AM, Chouser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 7:39 AM, Rich Hickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I'm sure a lot of people will appreciate this, thanks, although I have > > to admit to a pang of sadness that tiny Clojure comes in a box 100x > >

Re: Clojure Box (was Working combination of .emacs, Aquamacs, swank-clojure, clojure-mode?)

2008-11-21 Thread blackdog
On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 07:57:16 -0500 Chouser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 7:39 AM, Rich Hickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > I'm sure a lot of people will appreciate this, thanks, although I > > have to admit to a pang of sadness that tiny Clojure comes in a box >

Re: Clojure Box (was Working combination of .emacs, Aquamacs, swank-clojure, clojure-mode?)

2008-11-21 Thread Chouser
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 7:39 AM, Rich Hickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I'm sure a lot of people will appreciate this, thanks, although I have > to admit to a pang of sadness that tiny Clojure comes in a box 100x > its size :( I would hate to discourage this in any way (or let my vim roots sh

Re: Clojure Box (was Working combination of .emacs, Aquamacs, swank-clojure, clojure-mode?)

2008-11-21 Thread Rich Hickey
On Nov 20, 7:49 pm, "Shawn Hoover" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 8:27 AM, Daniel Renfer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > perhaps what we need is a clojure-in-a-box solution. We could create a > > package containing a version of clojure, emacs, slime, swank-clojure, > > cloju

Re: Clojure Box (was Working combination of .emacs, Aquamacs, swank-clojure, clojure-mode?)

2008-11-21 Thread Dmitry Neverov
> The result so far packs all of the above features in a 46MB installer. I'm > willing to pursue finishing it (and possibly making it smaller) if it would > be useful to others and if I can find a place to put it up. Great! I look forward to use it! --~--~-~--~~~---~-

Re: Clojure Box (was Working combination of .emacs, Aquamacs, swank-clojure, clojure-mode?)

2008-11-21 Thread AlamedaMike
I would find it useful. Given the number of posts on this group concerning editor setups, I'd say that a lot of others would as well. Mike --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to t

Re: Clojure Box (was Working combination of .emacs, Aquamacs, swank-clojure, clojure-mode?)

2008-11-21 Thread Geoffrey Teale
2008/11/21 Boris Schmid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Nice!. As a newbie, I found lispbox one of the easiest ways to set up > a lisp + emacs on windows, so I think a clojurebox will be a good > thing for people. > > (although currently I'm just using ssh to get to my work and emacs -nw > from there.) >

Re: Clojure Box (was Working combination of .emacs, Aquamacs, swank-clojure, clojure-mode?)

2008-11-20 Thread Boris Schmid
Nice!. As a newbie, I found lispbox one of the easiest ways to set up a lisp + emacs on windows, so I think a clojurebox will be a good thing for people. (although currently I'm just using ssh to get to my work and emacs -nw from there.) On 21 nov, 01:49, "Shawn Hoover" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote

Clojure Box (was Working combination of .emacs, Aquamacs, swank-clojure, clojure-mode?)

2008-11-20 Thread Shawn Hoover
On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 8:27 AM, Daniel Renfer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > perhaps what we need is a clojure-in-a-box solution. We could create a > package containing a version of clojure, emacs, slime, swank-clojure, > clojure-mode, and clojure-contrib. This could be as simple as a zip > file, b