GNU bug report logs - #36467
[PATCH 00/12] gnu: Add some Common Lisp libraries

Previous Next

Full log

Message #62 received at 36467 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Katherine Cox-Buday <cox.katherine.e <at> gmail.com>
To: Pierre Neidhardt <mail <at> ambrevar.xyz>
Cc: Guillaume Le Vaillant <glv <at> posteo.net>,
 Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>,
 Andy Patterson <ajpatter <at> uwaterloo.ca>, 36467 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#36467] [PATCH v3] gnu: Add some Common Lisp libraries
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2019 10:50:55 -0500

Pierre Neidhardt <mail <at> ambrevar.xyz> writes:

> Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org> writes:
>
>> We discussed whether to add “ecl-” packages in the first place a couple
>> of months ago IIRC, and I think the outcome was that it’s not worth it
>> most of the time.  Do I remember correctly Katherine, Pierre?
>
> Hmmm, I don't remember this conversation :p
> Do you have a link?

This conversation was with me[1]. (Also apologies for not getting back
to this. It's on the ever-growing TODO list).

> Those ecl- packages come for free, so it's cool to have them for users
> using ECL.  Admittedly, ECL is way less popular than SBCL, plus the cl-
> packages can always be used as a fallback.
> So no strong opinion on my end.

The point I made in the afforementioned thread was that there is no
guarantee that packages will work across the various Lisp runtimes. I
think we should be optimistic and include ecl- packages where we can,
but I have no problem with authors bailing on them if they don't work
and it wasn't the point of their patch.

> Either way, I guess this patch is ready to merge then.  ECL packages can
> always be tweaked later if need be.

Thank you, Guilluame, for the submission, Ludovic for maintaining, and
Pierre for reviewing and weighing in :)

[1] - https://issues.guix.info/issue/36131

-- 
Katherine

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.