Re: [racket-dev] raco pkg dependency checks and exit code

2013-10-03 Thread Jay McCarthy
On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 3:54 PM, Asumu Takikawa as...@ccs.neu.edu wrote: Hi all, I noticed that if you don't specify any dependencies for a package, then `raco` will warn you about that. However, the exit code is 0 and it's not an error. Comparatively, if you supply a dependencies field of

Re: [racket-dev] raco pkg dependency checks and exit code

2013-10-03 Thread Matthew Flatt
At Thu, 3 Oct 2013 06:45:12 -0600, Jay McCarthy wrote: On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 3:54 PM, Asumu Takikawa as...@ccs.neu.edu wrote: Hi all, I noticed that if you don't specify any dependencies for a package, then `raco` will warn you about that. However, the exit code is 0 and it's not an

Re: [racket-dev] raco pkg dependency checks and exit code

2013-10-03 Thread Asumu Takikawa
On 2013-10-03 06:45:12 -0600, Jay McCarthy wrote: In the first case, you are forgetting to do it and we warn to tell you what you should put. In the second case, you put them in but are wrong and should be CAUGHT and PUNISHED. I think that's the logic behind it. That seems fair, but then in

[racket-dev] info.rkt `deps` and new #:version keyword: Backward compatibility?

2013-10-03 Thread Greg Hendershott
After I gave my Frog talk at RacketCon, in which I said a goal of Frog was to make it easy to install, J. Ian Johnson tried to install it... but couldn't. As best I understand, it's because he was using Racket from HEAD, and at some point recently the `deps` expression for info.rkt changed for

Re: [racket-dev] info.rkt `deps` and new #:version keyword: Backward compatibility?

2013-10-03 Thread Jay McCarthy
On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 7:40 AM, Greg Hendershott greghendersh...@gmail.com wrote: After I gave my Frog talk at RacketCon, in which I said a goal of Frog was to make it easy to install, J. Ian Johnson tried to install it... but couldn't. As best I understand, it's because he was using Racket

Re: [racket-dev] info.rkt `deps` and new #:version keyword: Backward compatibility?

2013-10-03 Thread Greg Hendershott
Hmm, then maybe I'm misdiagnosing the error. If you were to try doing raco pkg install frog using 5.3.90.9 from HEAD as of a few days ago, you would see something like this: greg@halo:~$ ~/src/plt/racket/racket/bin/raco pkg install frog Resolving frog via https://pkg.racket-lang.org

Re: [racket-dev] info.rkt `deps` and new #:version keyword: Backward compatibility?

2013-10-03 Thread Greg Hendershott
On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 9:50 AM, Jay McCarthy jay.mccar...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 7:40 AM, Greg Hendershott The concept of backwards compatibility does not apply to beta software in my opinion. The next release will be the first release where the package system is not beta. I

Re: [racket-dev] info.rkt `deps` and new #:version keyword: Backward compatibility?

2013-10-03 Thread Laurent
On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Greg Hendershott greghendersh...@gmail.comwrote: On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 9:50 AM, Jay McCarthy jay.mccar...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 7:40 AM, Greg Hendershott The concept of backwards compatibility does not apply to beta software in my

Re: [racket-dev] info.rkt `deps` and new #:version keyword: Backward compatibility?

2013-10-03 Thread Greg Hendershott
I'm pretty sure this is a bug in `setup/collects` (or maybe elsewhere), and I reported it as PR 14063. Oh. In that case: 1. Thank you for logging the bug. 2. I'm sorry for the redundancy here on the mailing list. _ Racket Developers list:

Re: [racket-dev] package system, minimal builds and more

2013-10-03 Thread Robby Findler
are fixed now (with the snapshot build http://plt.eecs.northwestern.edu/snapshots/20131003-154d940/). Thanks! Robby _ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev

Re: [racket-dev] info.rkt `deps` and new #:version keyword: Backward compatibility?

2013-10-03 Thread Matthew Flatt
This problem is related to the reference of a package-level info.rkt from within a collection via a relative path. A relative path that leaves a collection confuses the compilation manager. So, it's a bug, but it's not related to dependency declarations --- or even the package system, really. At

[racket-dev] Looking for volunteer(s)

2013-10-03 Thread Eli Barzilay
I'm looking for someone to take over mailing list moderation and possibly other similar work like monitoring newsgroups etc. -- ((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x))) Eli Barzilay: http://barzilay.org/ Maze is Life!

[racket-dev] release

2013-10-03 Thread Matthias Felleisen
Tuesday was the beginning of the next release cycle. As you noticed, we did not send out a start-of-release message. Instead we have decided to postpone the beginning of the release cycle until approximately 10/24 so that we can get ready for the 6.0 release based on packages. Depending

Re: [racket-dev] patch for make-base-eval

2013-10-03 Thread Stephen Chang
Here's another attempt at a patch. Would someone mind code reviewing it? Ryan pointed me towards sandbox-namespace-specs and it seems to do the trick. I also added some tests and the docs seem to compile ok. On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 7:21 PM, Robby Findler ro...@eecs.northwestern.edu wrote:

Re: [racket-dev] patch for make-base-eval

2013-10-03 Thread Robby Findler
Do you need to do the same thing with file/convertible? Robby On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Stephen Chang stch...@ccs.neu.edu wrote: Here's another attempt at a patch. Would someone mind code reviewing it? Ryan pointed me towards sandbox-namespace-specs and it seems to do the trick. I

Re: [racket-dev] patch for make-base-eval

2013-10-03 Thread Stephen Chang
Do you need to do the same thing with file/convertible? The current version only attaches file/convertible. Robby On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Stephen Chang stch...@ccs.neu.edu wrote: Here's another attempt at a patch. Would someone mind code reviewing it? Ryan pointed me towards

Re: [racket-dev] patch for make-base-eval

2013-10-03 Thread Ryan Culpepper
I'm concerned about this: +[sandbox-namespace-specs + (cons (λ () (namespace-anchor-namespace anchor)) It seems like this would cause all evaluators to share a single namespace, if I'm reading the docs right. (That would be a good test to add.) Why not