[asdf-devel] Merge or not with upstream ECL's asdf?
Dear Juanjo, I see that your current ECL replaces si:: by ext: on a few symbols in its version of ASDF. Should I merge that into the official ASDF, or should I wait until you make a release of ECL? If I should merge, here is the attached patch that you or I can commit into ASDF. If I should not merge, then considering that differences are easier to track when ECL's ASDF and the upstream ASDF are kept in synch, maybe in the future we should make until ECL is released before we make such changes to even the internal version of ASDF? I suppose in both cases, I want to add that new (defmethod bundle-sub-operations ((o monolithic-lib-op) c) ...) —♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org
Hi Faré, sorry for the lack of response in the last days -- little time to code left and even less for reading mailing lists. On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 10:48 PM, Faré <fahree@gmail.com> wrote:
I see that your current ECL replaces si:: by ext: on a few symbols in its version of ASDF. Should I merge that into the official ASDF, or should I wait until you make a release of ECL?
It would be nice to have them merged now, for I will forget to do that afterwards. I also wanted to ask: is there any kind of automated testing of ASDF already set up? I am trying to fix ECL's compiler farm to do other tasks and do the ones it does in a bit cleaner way and thought maybe testing ASDF with some of the free compilers would be nice -- not a promise, but just a wish right now :) Juanjo -- Instituto de Física Fundamental, CSIC c/ Serrano, 113b, Madrid 28006 (Spain) http://juanjose.garciaripoll.googlepages.com
sorry for the lack of response in the last days -- little time to code left and even less for reading mailing lists.
Ningún problema.
I see that your current ECL replaces si:: by ext: on a few symbols in its version of ASDF. Should I merge that into the official ASDF, or should I wait until you make a release of ECL?
It would be nice to have them merged now, for I will forget to do that afterwards.
OK. Will do.
I also wanted to ask: is there any kind of automated testing of ASDF already set up? I am trying to fix ECL's compiler farm to do other tasks and do the ones it does in a bit cleaner way and thought maybe testing ASDF with some of the free compilers would be nice -- not a promise, but just a wish right now :)
cd .../asdf make do-test lisp=ecl make do-test lisp=ecl-bytecodes make do-test-all lisps='ecl ecl-bytecodes' Actually, I think I'll soon rename do-test to test-lisp and do-test-all to test-lisps. —♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org
participants (2)
-
Faré -
Juan Jose Garcia-Ripoll