Rich says "Git is not going to happen any time soon, great as it may be, given the current lack of infrastructure (google code) and tools support."
I'm curious as to why github isn't a viable alternative to google code? Now that it has issue tracking, I don't see the advantages of choosing google code over it (aside from the learning curve). Mike On Apr 17, 6:21 am, Rich Hickey <richhic...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks all for the feedback. One impression I get is that it seems the > existing community is getting along ok on trunk, so perhaps we also > need to consider those not yet using Clojure, possibly even because of > a lack of 1.0. > > I joked about book authors, but I'd like to make it clear that I think > it is very important that Stuart's book correspond to a release of > Clojure. It would be huge for newcomers coming to Clojure find a book > that says "Covers Clojure 1.0", and a compatible download for 1.0.x > with the latest fixes. > > Stuart has worked hard on tracking the latest changes, as have I in > trying to get in those changes that would be breaking as soon as I > could before 1.0. I'm presuming it's not too late to get "Covers > Clojure 1.0" in there (Stuart?), and, if so, it is a factor in this > decision. > > I'll also add that there is plenty more I'd like to do, and as soon as > I get into that trunk will again be changing rapidly. There simply has > to be a branch for fixes only. > > As to the feedback: > > A library management system seems like a tall order for a language > 1.0. It is certainly an interesting and useful pursuit, but given the > variety of approaches and opinions therein, it seems a bit out in > front of us. Advantages of Maven vs Ivy vs whatever should be > separate. Git is not going to happen any time soon, great as it may > be, given the current lack of infrastructure (google code) and tools > support. Is there some respect in which this impacts the core? It > would seem dangerous to marry any single approach in the language > itself. > > A deprecation policy is a good idea. Backward compatibility mode is > unlikely. > > As for tests, there are tests in: > > http://code.google.com/p/clojure-contrib/source/browse/#svn/trunk/src... > > Anyone who wants more tests can contribute them. > > Overall, I'm getting feature requests (more change!) and not a strong > drive for 1.0 stability. If you feel otherwise, please speak up. > Otherwise, my conclusion is that 1.0 may be more important for not-yet- > users wary of working from source. > > Rich --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
