On 06/05/2013 08:42 PM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote:
On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 8:19 PM, Matthew Flatt <[email protected]> wrote:I think we're at the point, though, for you to assess whether this is the right direction. If it looks like a good direction, then the follow-up question is how fast to move. Some possible conclusions: 1. This is the wrong way. 2. This is plausible, but the details are not right or not clear; we should stick with our current repository structure for at least one more release and consider switching after that. 3. This will work, and we should switch right away and start sorting out the details together --- but we should not actually break out into separate repositories until after a release or so. 4. This will work, we should try to switch right away --- AND we should split the repository as soon as possible.I'm mostly in favor of 3, but I'm still unsure about some of the details. I think we won't really converge on these details without moving forward [...]
This. Figuring out the details will go 20 times faster when we're all forced to work with them. I'm for #3.
Neil ⊥ _________________________ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
