[asdf-devel] ASDF 3? WAS Re: if-component-dep-fails

Robert Goldman rpgoldman at sift.info
Fri Dec 14 19:05:25 UTC 2012

On 12/14/12 Dec 14 -12:21 PM, Faré wrote:
> rpgoldman:
>> I think, if we remove :if-component-dep-fails and replace it with
>> something better (a choice I heartily applaud), and also add your
>> prepare-op, that sounds to me like a big enough change to the API to
>> warrant calling this ASDF 3 sometime soon....
>> There are enough API differences that I think being able to say
>> #+asdf3
>> might be useful...
> Problem: asdf's current versioning scheme will declare that asdf 3 is
> incompatible with asdf 2, so anyone who tries (asdf:version-satifies
> "3.0" "2.26") is in for a big disappointment.
> As long as we reasonably don't break compatibility, I propose we keep
> the asdf 2 series going indefinitely.

That's a good point.

If we are going to stick to ASDF 2 indefinitely, would it be a problem
to move to an xx.yy.zz format of versioning, where delta(yy) = change in
API and delta(zz) = patch?

The reason I suggest this is that it might be easier to keep track of
the way in which the xx's correspond to features you need that way.
Most people who are worried about whether their ASDF system definitions
will work could safely ignore the zz's.

Personally, I have pretty much lost track of when features I need were
added to ASDF.

Just a thought....  If it's too much trouble, don't worry about it.

More information about the asdf-devel mailing list