See below Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 14, 2013, at 8:03 AM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt <sa...@ccs.neu.edu> wrote: > First, thanks for the very informative update. > > On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 2:56 PM, Matthew Flatt <mfl...@cs.utah.edu> wrote: >> [Guess:] The "Racket" and "Minimal Racket" distributions might point >> to different pre-built package catalogs. Possibly, the "Racket" >> catalog never updates packages that were included in the installer (on >> the grounds that the user may not have write permission to the >> install), while the "Minimal Racket" catalog includes more frequent >> updates for bug fixes (on the grounds that the user can update any >> installed package). > > I'm not 100% sure what you mean about "different pre-built package > catalogs" but I definitely feel that we should just have one site like > `pkg.racket-lang.org` where people go to see what packages they might > install in their Racket installation. This comes back to the point > you make below about how technology, here the package server, can keep > a distributed community together. The ability to easily replace the server will be useful for people building "frozen" services where a piece of software wants to ensure that no updates could happen. > >> ** Using the bleeding edge as a PLT developer >> >> As a convenience to PLT developers, who tend to work on a particular >> set of packages, there is an alternate way of working on the bleeding >> edge (which anyone can use, if they prefer). >> >> [Guess #1:] Instead of cloning the core Racket repo, clone a "main >> distribution" repo that has the core Racket repo as a submodule, plus >> git submodules for each of the packages that are dependencies of >> "main-distribution". In other words, you get something that looks like >> the current Racket repo, but that uses git submodules. >> >> [Guess #2:] Instead of cloning the core Racket repo from GitHub, you >> clone from the "main distribution" repository, just like now. In >> addition to being mirrored to GitHub directly, individual parts of the >> "main distribution" repo are mirrored as GitHub repositories, and >> the mirrors are the ones that "pkg.racket-lang.org" references. > > Guess #2 seems to have a lot more complicated working parts, and it > seems like it would prevent us from actually using github for the all > the repositories -- ie, that we'd have to keep running our own git > server. > > Finally, can you say anything about whether you anticipate the release > process changing? Would it be possible to decouple the core Racket > releases from, say, the Typed Racket releases, with a release of the > whole system bundling specific versions of everything? > > Sam > _________________________ > Racket Developers list: > http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev _________________________ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev