At Sun, 14 Jul 2013 15:59:28 +0200, tog...@opensuse.org wrote:
> > On Sun, 14 Jul 2013 07:00:14 -0600, Matthew Flatt
> said:
>
> Matthew> Longer term, I think that OS-level packages/ports should probably
> Matthew> reflect a minimal Racket installation, and then further Racket
>
At Sun, 14 Jul 2013 23:58:23 +0200, Juan Francisco Cantero Hurtado wrote:
> I'm worried about something. What will be the policy related to the
> bugfix releases of the packages?. Now, if some part of racket is broken
> on OpenBSD, I temporally patch the port and wait the next release of
> racke
At Sun, 14 Jul 2013 09:43:13 -0400, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 9:29 AM, Matthew Flatt wrote:
> > At Sun, 14 Jul 2013 09:02:28 -0400, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote:
> >
> > But when you run `raco pkg install' or `raco pkg update', then the
> > package details are not necessari
At Sun, 14 Jul 2013 18:02:11 -0400, Greg Hendershott wrote:
> 1. Racket has a wonderful story about simple installation.
>
> [..]
>
> For many users, a monolithic(ish) simple install will remain a wonderful
> thing.
>
> As best I understand, the proposal isn't to get rid of that, instead
> it's
> On Mon, 15 Jul 2013 09:34:00 -0600, Matthew Flatt
> said:
Matthew> At Sun, 14 Jul 2013 15:59:28 +0200, tog...@opensuse.org wrote:
>> > On Sun, 14 Jul 2013 07:00:14 -0600, Matthew Flatt
>> said:
>>
Matthew> Longer term, I think that OS-level packages/ports shou
Matthew Flatt wrote at 07/13/2013 02:56 PM:
Others seem
overwhelmed by the details, unsure of how it will all work out, and
disconcerted by conflicting messages from others who seem to
understand the issues.
BTW, I don't know whether I'm involved in anyone being disconcerted. If
I am, please
6 matches
Mail list logo
