[asdf-devel] ASDF:SYSTEM-RELATIVE-PATHNAME in deployment scenarios

[Faré]

asdf:fasl-op is more reliable than the current abcl-jar at collating fasls,
but doesn't even try to get other files. I'd like to see a future where
abcl-jar relies on fasl-op for the fasl part, maybe even binary-op
for producing an according .asd for precompiled stuff, and otherwise
collects whatever other files need to be included (a tricky question).

In other words, I think that both abcl-jar and asdf:fasl-op are useful,
and they should be evolved to complement each other
rather than try to subsume each other.

—♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org
Reality must take precedence over public relations,
for Mother Nature cannot be fooled.
— R.P. Feynman


On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 6:05 PM, Erik Huelsmann <ehuels at gmail.com> wrote:
> Resending in order to get the message on asdf-devel@
>
> On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 11:33 PM, Erik Huelsmann <ehuels at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>> Today Mark and I were discussing the new ASDF3 capabilities which should
>> help with deployment: the monolithic-fasl-op, binary-op and others.
>>
>> While I do see lots of potential for the monolithic fasl op for code-only
>> deployment situations, Mark and Anton brought up scenarios where a system
>> may consist of code and resources. The code may choose to access such
>> resources at run time through the use of the SYSTEM-RELATIVE-PATHNAME
>> facility.
>>
>> Because I don't have an immediate answer myself yet (I'm just now learning
>> about this facility), I'm directing our discussion to asdf-devel at . How do
>> see this scenario?