Because my release process (or lack thereof) sucks.
a `release' target in the developer makefile helps.
It would. Too many manual steps right now, including doing things on several machines to check implementations that won't run under Linux amd64. Or I could have chroot's and/or emulators. Sigh. We'll see.
Fixed for now.
nope.
$ grep 013 modules/asdf/asdf.lisp (ASDF:VERSION-SATISFIES (ASDF:ASDF-VERSION) \"2.013\")." $ grep 014 modules/asdf/asdf.lisp ;;; This is ASDF 2.014: Another System Definition Facility. (asdf-version "2.014") ;; Will be removed in a future release, e.g. 2.014. $
1. why can I see 013 there? That's an example in a docstring. It's immaterial which version is shown there.
2. why wasn't whatever was it to be removed, removed?
Because 2.014 was an emergency release the week afterwards, rather than something that leaves time for developers to update their behavior. I notably need to talk to Attila regarding hu.dwim.asdf. Plan: in 2.015, there will be a warning. In 2.016, it will removed. Note: it was an unexported internal function. Thanks for caring, [ François-René ÐVB Rideau | Reflection&Cybernethics | http://fare.tunes.org ] When my time on earth is completed, I want to go quietly in my sleep, like my grandfather ... not screaming in terror, like his passengers.