[asdf-devel] :exclude in source-registry.conf getting ignored.

[Faré]

Honorable Senator,

I hopefully fixed your issue in 1.723, and another issue in 1.724.

[ François-René ÐVB Rideau | Reflection&Cybernethics | http://fare.tunes.org ]
Procrastination is great. It gives me a lot more time
to do things that I'm never going to do.




On 14 May 2010 05:06, szergling <senatorzergling at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/12/10, Faré <fahree at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Yes, I agree the exclude API is not very clean, sorry about that.
>> If you have a better design to propose, I'm all ears.
>
> <<snip>>
>
> I would if I could. :) While my original thoughts on this appear
> simple at first, on further examination, I have become confused with a
> couple of issues. Some suggestions and questions:
>
> 1. I think most hackers would expect that *default-exclusions* should
> not be overridden if the user provides an :exclude directive.
>
> (setf *default-exclusions* rest)
>
> should be something like
>
> (appendf *default-exclusions* rest)
>
> 2. What does it mean to inherit a configuration? Will exclusions be
> shared? For example, suppose directory "/a/b/x/" is meant to be
> excluded, and is specified in the user config file (which
> :inherit-configuration). If the system config (being inherited, if I
> understand correctly) specifies the tree "/a/b/", x/ (being a
> subdirectory) will get re-included again.
>
> 3. At the risk of confusing the meaning of "inherit" with CLOS
> inheritance, I was going to propose solving the "order of directive
> specification" issue by pre-reading all config info into a first class
> configuration object. This may facilitate inspecting/reasoning over
> them as well as supporting more direct interactions between
> directives.
>
> Thanks all I can think of for now...
>
> Yong.
>
>
>
>> On 11 May 2010 04:37, szergling <senatorzergling at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi list,
>>>
>>> Is it intended that :exclude in
>>>
>>> ~/.config/common-lisp/source-registry.conf
>>>
>>> should come before the :tree directive(s)[1]?
>>>
>>> To me, the manual seems to specify that the order
>>> in which the directives are provided does not matter.
>
> <<snip>>
>