Anyone interested in "package versioning"?

[Stelian Ionescu]

> I don't know much about Bazel, and I know a little about NixOS.
> Regardless, this seems to be moving the problem into how we globally
> synchronize our systems.
>
> I am absolutely boggled by this attitude. This is an issue that one
> runs into when writing Common Lisp code, and not an issue that one
> runs into writing in another language and associated ecosystem. To me,
> that's a Lisp problem. We can do some creative academic definitions, I
> think, but it's a problem when choosing Lisp as a tool.
 
It's not a Lisp-only problem, it's a general boolean satisfiability
problem that all languages have. The only way to deal with this is to
ensure that your entire ecosystem works with the same set of
dependencies, to check-in those dependencies in your repository and not
rely on "semantic versioning" or other such illusions, run the tests(do
actual QA) and be very conservative with upgrades.
Having a source control system that can keep everything in one
repository, with partial checkouts, is very useful in achieving that.
I've started to really appreciate Perforce in the last year or so.
 
At my previous company, we had so many problems with Node.js(good for
prototyping) because of the fact that npm(the package manager)
downloaded private copies of the libraries, that in the end I think they
rewrote the server to something more sensible, Java.
 
--
Stelian Ionescu a.k.a. fe[nl]ix
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur.
 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.common-lisp.net/pipermail/pro/attachments/20160519/01a94328/attachment.html>