Dear ASDF developers,
I posted the announcement for ASDF 2.013 on asdf-announce, and I see that almost no one is subscribed.
Should I subscribe asdf-devel? Or Cc: it to the announcements?
[ François-René ÐVB Rideau | Reflection&Cybernethics | http://fare.tunes.org ] Committee, n.: A group of men who individually can do nothing but as a group decide that nothing can be done. — Fred Allen
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Faré fahree@gmail.com Date: 20 March 2011 00:29 Subject: ASDF 2.013 released To: asdf-announce@common-lisp.net
Dear Common Lisp Users,
I just blessed ASDF 2.012.12 as 2.013. It includes many small improvements since previous release, for portability, robustness, usability. For the sake of making these improvements available to all users, I invite all vendors and packagers to update their software to include this latest release.
Improvements since 2.012: * Fixes and cleanups for CLISP, ECL, SBCL. * Added support for two legacy platforms: (R)MCL, Genera * Cleanup features: now using #+asdf-unix and #+asdf-window * Many cleanups and improvements regarding our portable pathname layer * Fixes a regression in source-registry scanning from 2.011.4 * Remember *source-registry-parameter* and *output-translations-parameter* * Export and document coerce-pathname (f.k.a merge-component-name-type) * allow description and long-description for all components * Several documentation updates
Happy hacking,
[ François-René ÐVB Rideau | Reflection&Cybernethics | http://fare.tunes.org ] I hold that America, Champion of the World is a betrayal of its humble beginnings as One Nation Underdog.
Faré fahree@gmail.com writes:
Dear ASDF developers,
I posted the announcement for ASDF 2.013 on asdf-announce, and I see that almost no one is subscribed.
The asdf page at http://common-lisp.net/project/asdf/#mailing-list doesn't even mention an announce list...
Should I subscribe asdf-devel? Or Cc: it to the announcements?
Cc would be good.
Zach
Hum. It so happened that 2.013 had various defects.
Since then, with 2.013.3, I have fixed these issues:
- It couldn't upgrade from 2.000 to 2.008, due to bug (introduced in 2.012.8) that prevented some package-wrangling. Fixed. DONE: added simple test for upgrades from egregious previous versions (please send me problematic versions) - It had a forward reference that cause sbcl to emit noise. Fixed. DONE: added a test for sbcl being non-noisy. - added better support for URL pathnames on SCL. TODO: add test.
The result is that while 2.013 is OK as a precompiled object provided by an implementation via (require :asdf) (except for SCL, which doesn't do it anyway), people using ASDF as upgraded software layered on top of an implementation that might already have loaded an earlier version of asdf will be in trouble, and will have to use 2.013.3 or later instead.
Thus, asdf 2.013 is probably a bad version for use with quicklisp or cl-launch.
Is it worth a 2.014 release? Probably not right now now, but possibly after a week or so for more feedback and patches.
Sorry for not getting it right the first time around.
[ François-René ÐVB Rideau | Reflection&Cybernethics | http://fare.tunes.org ] The Military *did* invent computers: computers sprung forth fully armed from a noncom's aching forehead between two barkings of orders at recruits.
- Faré snuerr-Er5WDRrDdr8NikgvhZjk3j@choyvp.tznar.bet [2011-03-20 00:36:14 +0000]:
I posted the announcement for ASDF 2.013 on asdf-announce, and I see that almost no one is subscribed.
I don't see it on gmane. I don't subscribe to mailing lists if I can help it. I use gmane instead.
-
Faré -
Sam Steingold -
Zach Beane