On Sun, 2010-04-11 at 21:23 +0200, Andreas Rottmann wrote: > using dorodango, it is possible to > manage library collections more easily, and this enables us to follow a > more fine-grained approach:
Yeah, that'll be cool to have dependency management for fine-grained approach. > I'd also appreciate thoughts about how to _name_ the libraries inside > the collections. I think someone (Derick?) has mentioned using (ported > ...) for third-party code ported to R6RS, and I'm fine with that, but > would like to hear other suggestions as well. Yeah, I suggested (ported ---) for community-maintained ported libraries. I like it because a top-level namespace is needed, because it's not proper to name them like (irregex) unless the author blesses that particular R6RS port, and "ported" describes the nature of the collection. > We also need to come up with a plan for how to manage these packages, > and in a sense assigning maintainer roles. I'd be willing to maintain at > least those that are currently in spells, but if someone else steps up > for one of those, that's OK with me as well. Feel free to incorporate/take stuff from Xitomatl and provide it in a different way. My view of Xitomatl has been that it's just my personal laboratory collection and useful stuff would be moved out. I don't have as much free time as I used to, but I should be able to help maintain some stuff in (ported ---). I think it'd be good if we helped maintain as necessary and as we're able, with flexible roles, instead of fixing maintainers for particular libraries, at least this early. LaunchPad has the facilities for the coordination, but I don't care if somewhere else is used, we just need proper facilities for coordinating. -- : Derick ----------------------------------------------------------------
