[tbnl-devel] TBNL survey / re-org

[Ralf Mattes]

On Sat, 2006-09-30 at 00:34 +0200, Edi Weitz wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Sep 2006 18:16:26 -0400, Travis Cross <travis at officetone.com> wrote:
> 
> > After you released Hunchentoot, I took a hard look at the source and
> > have been considering factoring out the non-portable code ever
> > since.  I'd be terribly happy if you beat me to it though ;)
> 
> There's a slight chance that this will happen... :)
> 
> > Another project on my TBNL agenda that I started part way down was
> > seeing if I could remove some dependencies (primarily kmrcl) without
> > adding a whole lot a code to TBNL.
> 
> LispWorks/Hunchentoot doesn't use KMRCL, so that's the plan for SBCL
> and the other Lisps as well.
> 
> > Do you happen to be sold on the wonders of the Darcs version control
> > system? ;) If you're not strongly tied to whatever VCS you're
> > currently using, a public darcs repository could be a real boon.
> 
> You wouldn't win anything, because I immediately make a new release if
> I add new code.  Im the case of RDNZL I once tried with a public
> repository, but although several people had write access nothing came
> out of it.  The only result was that it became harder for me and I
> couldn't work offline anymore...

Well, the one advantage i see in using darcs: it eases the creation
racking and maintenance of patches. And you don't need to develop in
your "public" darcs repository. Actually, you usually don't want to do
this: just develop on your box and propagate the patches to the public
repro. But the - last time i found a bugglet your fix was faster then my
patch, so why should i complaint ;-)

 Cheers, RalfD

> Cheers,
> Edi.
> _______________________________________________
> tbnl-devel site list
> tbnl-devel at common-lisp.net
> http://common-lisp.net/mailman/listinfo/tbnl-devel