Issues with package location information on SBCL

[Robert Goldman]

This does seem to illustrate an issue with the current "export 
everything that's in UIOP" strategy.

Should we consider changing this policy?

Or, if we have "internal" functions that we don't want to be visible 
through `UIOP/DRIVER`, should we simply not export them from the 
sub-packages and use `:import-from` to move them among the sub-packages?

Best,
r


On 19 Feb 2018, at 18:22, Faré wrote:

> On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 7:03 PM, Eric Timmons <etimmons at mit.edu> 
> wrote:
>> Glad to help! I've also opened the following bug on SBCL to let them 
>> know
>> about it: https://bugs.launchpad.net/sbcl/+bug/1750466.
>>
> Thanks!
>
>> Also, I checked that nothing else in ASDF uses 
>> `parse-define-package-form`,
>> but I somehow missed until just now that it's actually exported from 
>> uiop
>> =/. Is there any concern about another library using it? If so, I can 
>> try to
>> fix it in such a way that the output of `parse-define-package-form` 
>> is
>> unchanged.
>>
> I wouldn't worry about that: grepping through quicklisp systems 
> reveals no user.
>
> —♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• 
> http://fare.tunes.org
> It costs the nation millions to keep Gandhi living in poverty — 
> Sarojini Naidu
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.common-lisp.net/pipermail/asdf-devel/attachments/20180220/8a1f3015/attachment-0001.html>