[asdf-devel] ASDF 1.501

[Faré]

On 1 February 2010 10:18, Robert Goldman <rpgoldman at sift.info> wrote:
> On 2/1/10 Feb 1 -12:59 AM, Tobias C. Rittweiler wrote:
>> Before bumping to 2.0 directly, I'd suggest to go through at least one
>> phase of release candidate. The release candidate is pushed to vendors
>> (hopefully they will adopt even though it's called release candidate),
>> the difference is that all newly introduced APIs are marked as
>> "Experimental" until the actual 2.0 release. So the API is time-tested
>> for a few months.
Yes. When we've got the configuration and upgrade story together,
we'll do a first round of glaring bug fix and push a 1.900 to the
vendors.

> The thing I would most like to see before the release of ASDF 2.0 is
> closure on the question of how to achieve backwards compatibility.
Starting with asdf 1.900 we'd push :asdf2 in the features.
>From then on, asdf:*asdf-version* will be guaranteed to exist.

> Let's say that I want to provide a library with an ASDF system
> definition that will work on both "Classic" ASDF and ASDF 2.0.  How do I
> do this?
#+asdf2

> :asdf-test-op-load-op-depend
No, too complex, I'd say.

> Of these, I think I favor the :asdf2, but I fear it, because it means
> we'll end up with :asdf2.5, :asdf2.6, ... etc.  But that may be the best
> we can come up with.
For 2.5, 2.6, etc., use a check on asdf:*asdf-version*, I'd say.

[ François-René ÐVB Rideau | Reflection&Cybernethics | http://fare.tunes.org ]
May your desire to be correct overcome your desire to have been correct
(which you were not, anyway).           — Faré