[asdf-devel] default source registry...

[Faré]

Yes, ASDF will still work, in a backward-compatible way, if you only
use the *central-registry*. This is actively supported.

I'd like to eventually promote (asdf:initialize-source-registry ...)
as an alternative to setf'ing *central-registry* when configuring from
Lisp, and eventually declare the latter obsolete, but we're not quite
there yet.

[ François-René ÐVB Rideau | Reflection&Cybernethics | http://fare.tunes.org ]
Backwards compatible — If it's not backwards it's not compatible
        — Greg Newton <gregnewton at netscape.net>




On 22 February 2010 13:48, Robert Goldman <rpgoldman at sift.info> wrote:
> On 2/22/10 Feb 22 -11:23 AM, Faré wrote:
>> Should we base our search path on the XDG Base Directory Specification?
>>  http://standards.freedesktop.org/basedir-spec/basedir-spec-latest.html
>> To the point of actually using getenv to get these search paths?
>>
>> I say we should.
>
> Only to the extent that we maintain the possibility for people who want
> to configure their environment in pure lisp to do so.
>
> I clicked on that link, read about 10 words and decided that I had
> already spent more than enough time on it.
>
> As far as I'm concerned, as long as I can still type
>
> (push "home:lisp;myLibrary;" asdf:*central-registry*)
>
> and it Just Works, go wild.
>
> But if this is going to make me bend over backwards to work around XDG,
> then no, please don't.
>
> My take on this is that I want to get my lisp environment working
> entirely within the confines of ~/clinit.cl and ~/.sbcl (aside from
> recording the location of the lisp executables).  I don't want to do
> anything at all with the shell, or any extra bonus configuration files.
>
> If other people want the *opportunity* to use environment variables or
> config files, but not the *obligation*, then I think it's a great idea.
>
> Cheers,
> r