On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 4:55 PM, Robert P. Goldman rpgoldman@sift.net wrote:
Unfortunately, the build went south for me at the first introduction of the precompilation into the build, so stable never happened for me.
Apologies again for all the trouble.
TBH, I would suggest the building happen outside the ASDF repository entirely. Scripting isn't part of the ASDF objective, so I think having a scripting engine that one installs separately would make a lot of sense. The ASDF build tools are like bundling building of bash together with the"make" tool's build and maintenance.
I'm thinking about it, in case I go back to hacking build and test tools for CL. That was the XCVB model, BTW. But at this time, I suppose we can declare XCVB dead. ASDF improved enough that the future will be either an ASDF4, or something completely different and general purpose like Bazel.
That said, even if the build tools were restructured, I wouldn't use them. They have been too rickety for me. They have failed one too many times, and I'm not going back.
I am also unwilling to learn a new scripting framework, especially one under active development.
Sorry, but she'll scripting for me isn't broken enough for me to enter into the project of developing a new alternative to perl and python. My active research is in other fields. I'd be interested to see what you all come up with, but right now I have other priorities.
Well, it's pretty stable this days and not "under actively development" anymore, but point taken.
—♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org Pick the fight that if you win it will make every other fight easier to win. — Tarren Bragdon