On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 5:34 PM, John Clements
wrote:
>
> On May 30, 2013, at 1:47 PM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote:
>
>> After a long hiatus, I'm again working on migrating our bug database
>> to GitHub issues. My plan is to convert a large portion of the old
>> bugs (more than 5 years old, up to 94
On May 30, 2013, at 1:47 PM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote:
> After a long hiatus, I'm again working on migrating our bug database
> to GitHub issues. My plan is to convert a large portion of the old
> bugs (more than 5 years old, up to 9433) in the near future, and in
> particular all of the bugs fi
In the attached screenshot (hopefully small enough to get through the size filter), I see that the background of the "comment semicolon" is rendered in white, regardless of the background color. Based on the lack of space between that bar and the enclosed text, I'm imagining this is a bug. On the
After a long hiatus, I'm again working on migrating our bug database
to GitHub issues. My plan is to convert a large portion of the old
bugs (more than 5 years old, up to 9433) in the near future, and in
particular all of the bugs filed before the bug DB moved to
Northeastern (up to ~2100) very soo
Yes, I really want to try and get to look into doing this. The thing
is that multi-collection libraries are going to be a common case for
plt packages (which will get pulled out from the main repository), but
the single-collection ones are going to be the much more popular case
elsewhere.
(And I
The Racket package system doesn't support packages that aren't
collection roots. Eli has said that he wants to implement such a
feature, but it is not available today.
Jay
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 8:29 AM, Laurent wrote:
> I'm willing to upgrade my packages for the new PLaneT system, but one thin
Quite right. You caught it. Thanks.
-Ian
- Original Message -
From: "Matthew Flatt"
To: "J. Ian Johnson"
Cc: "J. Ian Johnson" , "dev"
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2013 12:42:18 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: Re: [racket-dev] raco pkg remove not removing
Does `raco link -l' show any
Does `raco link -l' show any trace of the old package (which would
suggest that the package manager failed between the points of removing
its own registration of the package and removing the link)?
If the package install was not installation-wide, then all state should
be in your "add-on" director
Following Asumu's advice, I used --force. I got the same error, but then it was
no longer installed. I tried to install again with the fixed files. It's still
looking for a directory for-accumulate! There's nothing in my repository that
references that name anymore. I'm quite confused. Are there
I tried to turn my nifty-macros repo into something that the new package
manager could work with. I recently changed for-accumulate.rkt to for-acc.rkt
but forgot to change main.rkt to require and reprovide from the new file. I
installed from github and it died on looking for the for-accumulate d
As I understand things, we should certainly try to align divisions of
responsibility with divisions of code (including tests and docs) among
packages.
My initial experiment probably doesn't align them very well, and I'd
expect a better alignment to emerge from everyone's efforts to improve
some in
Matthew,
I have seen 'personal responsibility' mentioned only in passing.
Does existence of package imply any personal responsibilities?
The current organization doesn't seem to say so.
-- Matthias
_
Racket Developers list:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
At Thu, 30 May 2013 10:02:29 -0400, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote:
> One question, though: how does this work with the package manager.
> Right now, only repositories can be specified as the source when
> creating a package at pkg.racket-lang.org. There must be something
> I'm missing about how this w
I'm willing to upgrade my packages for the new PLaneT system, but one thing
that pushes me back is the fact that I need to create a directory for my
package and a subdirectory for the collection(s).
But most of my packages are (and will probably be) single-collection
packages, and it hurts my logi
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 9:07 AM, Matthew Flatt wrote:
> At Thu, 30 May 2013 09:01:16 -0400, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote:
>> I also really don't want to have Typed Racket's documentation outside
>> of Typed Racket's code repository, and I think it would be a mistake
>> to do that for other parts of R
At Thu, 30 May 2013 09:01:16 -0400, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote:
> I also really don't want to have Typed Racket's documentation outside
> of Typed Racket's code repository, and I think it would be a mistake
> to do that for other parts of Racket. An on-point comment on this
> from just yesterday in
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 8:50 AM, Matthew Flatt wrote:
>
> To summarize, I see our options as
>
> 1. Suspend the effort to reorganize our repository into packages and
> instead start experimenting with subpackages.
>
> 2. Use a naming convention and keep the same kind of split as in the
>
At Wed, 29 May 2013 15:51:30 -0400, Eli Barzilay wrote:
> 20 minutes ago, Matthew Flatt wrote:
> > > [..."package distribution kinds"...]
> >
> > Well, I agree with all these thoughts, but what's the conclusion?
> >
> > There's no requirement that packages be in multiple repositories,
> > but dif
Hi, Ian!
> The for[/*] macros are fairly low in the language tower for Racket, so
making these kinds of changes robust in the original implementation is
cumbersome and error-prone.
I supposed that adding anything as optional would not affect existing stuff.
> I've written a shim to use on top of
19 matches
Mail list logo
