Yesterday, Jay McCarthy wrote:
> Planet attempts to solve this problem technically by (a) having all
> collections be prefixed by <author>/<package-name> and (b) mandating
> a centralized server that enforces unique <author>s and unique
> <package-name>s per author. Since Racket packages don't have a
> mandated central server we can't enforce uniqueness like that. (i.e.
> even if we mandated the prefix by <package-name>, there's no way to
> enforce unique package names across the universe without a central
> server.) Furthermore, bringing <package-name>s in to the code would
> give us /internal linking/ which Racket packages are designed to
> avoid for other reasons.
>
> Since technical solutions to this problem are lacking,
An easy way to make it a non problem would be to eliminate the extra
indirection that is in package names: if the package that Carl is
asking about is *named* "data/red-black-tree" then it clearly
conflicts with another package with the same name.
--
((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x))) Eli Barzilay:
http://barzilay.org/ Maze is Life!
_________________________
Racket Developers list:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
