[Asdf-devel] converting asdf build & test to Lisp

Faré fahree at gmail.com
Mon Jun 2 04:56:10 UTC 2014

> minimakefile will have to wait.  I don't see a pressing need to merge
> it.  It provides no new functionality, only an experiment with using
> ASDF to enable CL to be used as a scripting langauge.  That's nice, but
> until it *eases* my development, instead of complicating it, I don't
> expect to merge this branch.  The existing makefile isn't broken in a
> way that the minimakefile fixes.  I have already specified changes that
> need to be made in this branch before it can be merged:
Actually, it now does provide some additional functionality:
* make help to show all the commands, with a short documentation line
for each. The old Makefile had no such thing.
* all Lisp commands invoked are now specified according to a list of
Lisp forms that isn't obfuscated for passing through bad Windows
implementations; on error, messages are printed that work fine for
reproducing the bug, with or without obfsuation.

> 1. It must provide bash completion that is *at least as* good as make does.
Done (I hope)

> 2. It must have more documentation.
Done — there was about none on the old scheme, there are docstrings
everywhere not.

> Note that these are lower bounds.  My ASDF development infrastructure is
> not a place for experimentation. Experiments that provide clear benefits
> *to me* are likely to be accepted. Experiments that further unrelated
> goals (develop CL as a scripting environment) will not: novel CL
> technology development is not my job as ASDF maintainer.
I agree. I believe the new asdf-tools replacement for the Makefile is
a success at making things easier. Release scripts are now possible in
a way that they weren't before.

> As the delays in reviewing the syntax-control branch illustrate, I don't
> have a lot of spare cycles for ASDF right now (a number of projects
> entering critical state this month). So ASDF items that don't provide a
> compelling benefit (bugfix or significantly easier development) are
> going to be back-burnered till more attention becomes available.
> Sorry, but it's better that I restrict myself to doing what I can do
> competently, rather than overextend and do a crummy job on everything.
> In general, I think this should be acceptable, because the heroic days
> of fixing the big bugs in ASDF are over.  We are entering a stage of
> maintaining mature and successful technology.
I understand your position.

—♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org
Lorsque la consigne est infâme, la désobéissance est un devoir

More information about the asdf-devel mailing list