I personally don't see any value in leaving out the docs or DrScheme. Everything is so small anyways and hard drive space is cheap... I don't get the use case.
Jay On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 8:25 AM, Matthias Felleisen <matth...@ccs.neu.edu> wrote: > > Thanks for the responses. The responses propose three natural things: > > 1. We need the nightly builds. > > 2. Eli's component rules must be turned into something that people can read > up on. > > 3. The email about rule violations should not go to Eli but to plt-dev. > (It's all implemented, no need to shift it anywhere.) > > ;; --- > > There were no comments on component-oriented distribution. > > -- Matthias > > > > > > > > On Nov 10, 2009, at 12:20 PM, Matthias Felleisen wrote: > >> >> Ladies and gentlemen, >> >> Eli spent my first hour++ in my office this morning pointing our serious >> flaws in our world. Here are two important points, and I am putting them up >> for discussion here with a request for sensible comments: >> >> 1. In some way we have been conducting a social experiment for the past 10 >> days or so. As you all know, Eli spent a considerable time creating the >> nightly build framework when he first arrived here. From the nightly build, >> Eli's software also creates a nightly set of deliveries and puts them up on >> the web somewhere. What you ma not realize is that the nightly builds have >> been broken for some 10 days due to the check-in of a module that breaks the >> component delivery mechanism. >> >> Nobody complained, so our conclusion was that nobody noticed. Our second >> corollary was that perhaps we only have a camel-back distribution of users: >> those who use svn and build from svn and those that use only the releases. >> (As Eli walked out of my office, I switched to my email and the first >> message contained a complaint about the missing nightly deliveries. This >> means we know of one user of the deliveries.) >> >> 2. Which brings me to the topic of "delivery by component." Apparently >> few, if anyone here, is aware of Eli's carefully arrange delivery layers: >> >> -- smallest: plain mzscheme, no mred, no docs >> -- mid size: mred, drscheme, no docs >> -- largest: everything >> >> Eli tells me that there are numerous people who use 'smallest'; I don't >> know about mid. >> >> He (and I and I know Robby) have for a long time envisioned a delivery >> system that starts with a core package and then asks (possibly via some gui) >> what other packages should be installed, e.g., the 'mred' layer or the >> server. The three-tier delivery system is a first step toward this >> component-oriented delivery. >> >> Eli has carefully maintained a dependency graph and list (that takes some >> 11megs) among the various files (8 platforms, 3 tiers, everything spelled >> out). Since people aren't really aware of this system, they easily and >> apparently relatively often break the non-cyclic dependencies. (I am guilty >> of doing this myself when I wrote the first docs that depended on >> slideshow.) >> >> In my opinion, we have two options: >> >> -- drop the dependency system and just deliver one large package >> -- enforce the dependencies. If you break them, you get a message. >> If you don't clean them up in N hours, the file is removed. >> >> ;; --- >> >> As I said, sensible comments welcome. -- Matthias >> >> >> >> >> _________________________________________________ >> For list-related administrative tasks: >> http://list.cs.brown.edu/mailman/listinfo/plt-dev > > _________________________________________________ > For list-related administrative tasks: > http://list.cs.brown.edu/mailman/listinfo/plt-dev > -- Jay McCarthy <j...@cs.byu.edu> Assistant Professor / Brigham Young University http://teammccarthy.org/jay "The glory of God is Intelligence" - D&C 93 _________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://list.cs.brown.edu/mailman/listinfo/plt-dev