Hi Nikolaos,

[...]

>> More documentation would be useful, of course.
>
> Sure, but do you have maintainer rights to Guile? I don't want to
> embark on this journey of improving Guile's documentation with regards
> to build systems if my patch is unwanted/gets ignored. In particular:

I do not have commit rights to Guile, no. If you do come up with a
documentation patch, I'd recommend creating a PR at
https://codeberg.org/guile/guile;  perhaps the odds of it being ignored
will be lower, or at least it will be a bit more difficult to overlook
it than by email :-).

> 1) The issues with Guile and Autotools need to be outlined: a) Guile
> wants to install both source and compiled files b) Guile is
> second-class to Autotools (say, unlike C) and c) the mtime issue with
> the .scm.go rule that currently requires a "hack" to fix on Autotools.
> To be specific, I'm talking about Automake too when I mention
> Autotools. The examples in the manual only consider Autoconf.
> 2) More examples need to be included, both as snippets in the manual
> and full examples in the GNU Guile distribution.
> 3) The meta/guile.m4 file has issues that need fixing, for instance
> GUILE_SITE is a hardcoded path that disallows the use of --prefix.

What is the mtime issue with .scm.go? I don't think I've encountered a
problem with it. Anyway, this all sounds very useful to document and/or
fix, so I'd encourage you to work on it.

-- 
Thanks,
Maxim

Reply via email to