Hi,
On 2014-05-25 17:51 CEST, Faré wrote:
> I already replied to this same message in another thread:
>
> Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 21:06:07 +0200
> Message-ID:
>
> Subject: Re: RFS: Please upload cl-asdf package
> From: =?UTF-8?B?RmFyw6k=?=
> To: Kambiz Darabi ,
> Debian Common Lisp Team
sorr
I already replied to this same message in another thread:
Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 21:06:07 +0200
Message-ID:
Subject: Re: RFS: Please upload cl-asdf package
From: =?UTF-8?B?RmFyw6k=?=
To: Kambiz Darabi ,
Debian Common Lisp Team
—♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fa
On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 5:28 AM, Robert P. Goldman wrote:
> Faré wrote:
>> Here's the patch I've committed on my local release branch, but
>> haven't pushed to common-lisp.net yet, pending maintainer approval.
>
> That's fine with me; you have my blessing.
>
> Kambiz, if you'd like to take over, t
Faré wrote:
> Here's the patch I've committed on my local release branch, but
> haven't pushed to common-lisp.net yet, pending maintainer approval.
That's fine with me; you have my blessing.
Kambiz, if you'd like to take over, that would be a huge help. I don't
think I'm going to be able to maint
On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 7:12 PM, Faré wrote:
> 4- A good exercise in further bootstrapping ASDF would be convert
> bin/asdf-builder to a trivial cl-launch script + a system asdf-build
> (or meta-asdf? whatever), and the Makefile to a trivial wrapper that
> invokes it (except for the initial bootst
Here's the patch I've committed on my local release branch, but
haven't pushed to common-lisp.net yet, pending maintainer approval.
Note that
1- the email listed at the end of the top entry of the changelog has
to be the same as the person who's going to sign the package with his
PGP key as regist
Hello,
On 2014-05-16 07:12 CEST, Faré wrote:
> That said, I can do the asdf debian package one last time for 3.1.2.
> I've experimented a bit and come up with a better recipe. Apparently
> the trick to avoid dealing with complications is to work in a branch
> where the only changes since the ups
> I'm inclined to think that figuring out how to load ASDF from the
> cl-asdf debian package to override an ASDF that has been packaged with
> your implementation is no easier than doing so from cl.net. Indeed, it
> may actually be more complicated, since you have to figure out how to
> load from
Faré wrote:
>> 2. If the answer to #1 is "no," how bad is that, anyway? Does anyone
>> > actually use ASDF from cl-asdf instead of getting it bundled from their
>> > implementation or installing from source? Maybe this package could
>> > simply go away?
>> >
> cl-asdf used to be very important b
On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 10:53 PM, Robert P. Goldman wrote:
> For previous versions of ASDF, Faré has been providing a debian package,
> cl-asdf.
>
> I'd like a volunteer to take over the packaging process.
>
> The more I mess with this, the less I feel like I know what I'm doing.
> I haven't *main
10 matches
Mail list logo
