[Asdf-devel] request for test: experimental-submodules branch

[Robert P. Goldman]

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.