On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 03:51:08PM +0200, pvane...@debian.org wrote: > > I took some time to fully rewrite the Common Lisp page on the Debian wiki: > > > > https://wiki.debian.org/CommonLisp <https://wiki.debian.org/CommonLisp> > > I like it! > > Two comments however: > - I would steer newbies to clisp instead of ECL on platforms which don’t > support SBCL…
The problem is that the clisp package is currently in very bad shape (5 RC bugs, FTBFS on many archs). In particular it was neither part of stretch nor of jessie. So it may not be very helpful to redirect our users to a package not present in our last two stable releases… Maybe could we recommend "clisp or ECL"? > - packaging up of CL libraries has been abandoned (at least for me). Newbies > - should be steered to quicklisp, even if the library is packaged IMHO. Ok. Out of curiosity, is this decision motivated by technical factors or by lack of (packager’s) time? Would you think putting the "quicklisp" section before the "apt" section is a sufficient fix? Or should we be more explicit and add a warning about the discontinuation of libraries packaging? > As I said: I do like it, a welcome resource. Thanks for your comments and positive feedback. By the way, I applied on Alioth for joining the team (now waiting for your acceptation). As a first task, I may be interested in salvaging clisp, if you welcome help on that side. Cheers, -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name ⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ http://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ pkg-common-lisp-devel mailing list pkg-common-lisp-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-common-lisp-devel
