On Mon Apr 10, 2006 at 01:28:05PM +0200, Mario S.Mommer wrote:
Hello,
GP lisper spambait@CloudDancer.com writes:
On Sun, 09 Apr 2006 22:57:43 +0200, m_mommer@yahoo.com wrote:
During the last few weeks, I have seen lots of people stumble over the slime-1.2.1 tarball, and having it not work. I think this is a pitty.
Who? Brand new users? Old-timers?? With the lack of posts here, I'd guess it's beginners, and you only hear about failures from them.
If what you are saying is that only newbies have problems with the 1.2.1 thing, well, yes. What does that change? I don't understand your point.
Just out of curiosity, how would one know about troubles with 1.2.1 that weren't posted to the list?
And what's involved in updating the tarball to a new version? I might be willing to help with that myself.
One reason for continuing to offer Slime through the tarball is that many larger company firewalls block the port used by CVS. It is apparently a Microsoft Server Admin recommendation for "security".
Regards,
-Jeff
Once I got slime working, I've never had a problem from CVS that wasn't immediately cleared up - i.e., no loss of opportunity to code Lisp.
That's nice to hear. I've had no problems with slime _whatsoever_, and don't remember ever hitting a bug. The only things that have happened to me is that I discover by accident yet another feature :-)
If nobody wants to engineer regular releases, it would be already a *lot* better to just substitute the slime-1.2.1 with weekly snapshots.
Getting it from CVS is simple, is easily automated, and is the most 'up-to-date'. I'm strongly in favor of minimizing the workload on devs.
That's why I offered to help with this.
Regards, Mario.
slime-devel site list slime-devel@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/mailman/listinfo/slime-devel