I like this idea too, because if you end up wanting to port this package manager to CLR, Parrot, or JS, you're less tied down to the package formats of specific platforms.
Heck, even if Clojure was ported to Ruby (not that there'd be any point to do that), you could wrap the Gems framework. On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 1:30 AM, James Reeves <weavejes...@googlemail.com>wrote: > > On Aug 7, 10:17 am, Lauri Pesonen <lauri.peso...@iki.fi> wrote: > > Surely we can do better with s-expressions: > > > > (:repository "third-party" [(:package "Compojure" "/compojure.xml")]) > > Not very forward compatible, though. > > Perhaps we should sidestep the whole question about the format of > package metadata. At some point, the metadata will have to be parsed > into a Clojure data structure, so we could have a parsing multimethod > that could take a variety of different input formats. > > This would allow Maven repositories (in XML) to co-exist with Clojure > repositories (in S-Exprs). > > - James > > > -- John --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
