[Asdf-devel] request for test: experimental-submodules branch
Robert P. Goldman
rpgoldman at sift.info
Tue Aug 26 15:23:32 UTC 2014
Faré wrote:
>>> Actually, the asdf initialization routine could unconditionally
>>> add the asdf tree to the path: either it's present or not, but it
>>> doesn't hurt to try,
>>> and so no need to export ASDF_DEVEL_SOURCE_REGISTRY, then.
>> I'm not entirely sure about this. Here's my question: if someone is
>> developing code in one of those modules, and wants to see if it messes
>> up ASDF development, might they want to override this to point to
>> private copies of some or all of the dependencies? In that case, maybe I
>> should leave it around....
>>
> Another option: leave it around, but have it default to the ASDF
> source tree. Best of both worlds?
Yes, that's what I did. I just pushed a new version of
experimental-submodules. If it looks good, I'll merge it into master
and then we can see about merging it into minimakefile...
>
> As usual, I like being able to configure, but I like even more being
> able to NOT configure.
Agreed. This should achieve that objective, I hope.
>
>> This would also be a place to test your new quicker-loading option.
>>
> Certainly.
OK, I'll look into that next.
More information about the asdf-devel
mailing list