On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 9:01 PM Jakub T. Jankiewicz <[email protected]> wrote: > > The problem with brute forcing is a browser. With you own computer it's not > an issue to search for a file, but with browser based interpreter (like > try.schmeme.org) everything should be in right place if this is per git repo > it will be easily to fetch the repo and get a file like package.scm from root > directory of a package so see the detail of the package.
Note you're switching topics from package management to working with installed libraries in a specific Scheme implementation (browser based). An R7RS implementation doesn't necessarily even have files - Chibi with images can run without a filesystem. > Snowball may be problematic when defining package, because I think it's more > for a libraries, if each file is in same directory. It allows defining libraries and/or binaries in any directory layout, with the possibility of multiple of each in the same package. And no file searching is involved. > So if you have package with (sort nice) (copy nice) how you will find nice.scm > file or whatever the extension is? On server/computer this maybe not a > problem because traversing the files is fast. But I can't imaging poking in > browser to see if file exists. You have to know where the packages are to begin with. Snow-fort defines these in a single master package file (repo.scm), but we can imagine multiple repos on multiple hosts. The repo file specifies everything you need to know to load the library without having to search for files. For lazy loading of repos from a browser-based impl you can imagine partitioning repos based on the library pet names. We don't have to bake this into the package format - you need some master registry of all of the package providers to begin with, and this can provide such info as needed. And again, you don't want to complicate the package format, since that may discourage authors from providing their modules in our format to begin with. -- Alex
