I'm also very curious because I might have a use for it soon.
I'm curious about the Bazel namespace problem. Can you elaborate a bit ...
On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 4:57 PM Faré fahree@gmail.com wrote:
rpg:>> Given that Quicklisp and SBCL already refuse to update their bundled ASDF versions, because of warnings about deprecated behavior, I'm reluctant to donate any of my unpaid time to fixing this: it's a strong disincentive to making any improvements to ASDF, as opposed to just fixing bugs around the edges. On the other hand, the whole point of ASDF 2 and later was that by making ASDF upgradable (and with ASDF 3, it's now automatically self-upgradable), users shouldn't have to care as much which version of ASDF their implementation and package distribution system do or don't provide: "just" install the latest ASDF in e.g. ~/common-lisp/asdf/ and things will "just work". If the new ASDF is so much better, eventually the implementors and distributors should follow.
si:> Is it time for ASDF 4 ? There's tons of stuff I'd like to delete or change. It's always time for ASDF 4, and never time for ASDF 4. The main question is: is someone crazy enough to sink in the time to do it, the emotional energy to fight half the community, etc.
If only Bazel didn't fuck up their namespace system, the solution could have been "just use Bazelisp".
If and when someone volunteers to do ASDF 4 (if ever), there are plenty of suggestions in the asdf/TODO file, in addition to the issues on gitlab and the old launchpad. Good luck!
—♯ƒ • François-René Rideau • Chief Scientist, MuKn.com “With freedom, no more One True Scale to rank people. Everyone pick his own. Why vie for a society of equals, when everyone can be superior?”