>>>: fare
>>: james anderson
>
>>> And even then you'll have a hard time fixing things that users
>>> can now trivially do with the following translation:
>>>
>>> (:root ("C:/my/cl/cache" :implementation))
>>>
>>> This will work and make his file in
>>> \\remote-host\myshare\cl\cl-foo\foo-V2.000\
On 2010-04-21, at 04:00 , Faré wrote:
> [...]
>
>
>> the additions
>> to the code base over the past few months were devoted to two areas:
>>
>> - configuration
>> - output translations
>>
>> i neglect, for the moment, the configuration component of the asdf
>> evolution and concentrate on questi
On 2010-04-21, at 12:12 , Juan Jose Garcia-Ripoll wrote:
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 11:50 AM, james anderson
wrote:
further experiments demonstrated that - with changes to the scripts
to account for functions which would be removed, all regression tests
pass, and that with appropriate initializ
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 11:50 AM, james anderson wrote:
> further experiments demonstrated that - with changes to the scripts
> to account for functions which would be removed, all regression tests
> pass, and that with appropriate initialization, a multi-runtime build
> is supported for the norma
On 2010-04-21, at 10:56 , Juan Jose Garcia-Ripoll wrote:
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 10:31 AM, james anderson
wrote:
the patch which was enclosed in the earlier message[2] demonstrated
an implementation which modifies the three functions - component-
pathname, input-files, and output-files, exte
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 10:31 AM, james anderson wrote:
> the patch which was enclosed in the earlier message[2] demonstrated
> an implementation which modifies the three functions - component-
> pathname, input-files, and output-files, extends the function which
> constructs the component absolut
On 2010-04-21, at 04:00 , Faré wrote:
> Dear James,
>
>> before one can declare asdf 2.0 to be feature complete, one should
>> have a specification of its intended function and then gauge the
>> implementation in those terms.
>>
> I humbly disagree. The standards that I have set to myself for ASD
Dear James,
> before one can declare asdf 2.0 to be feature complete, one should
> have a specification of its intended function and then gauge the
> implementation in those terms.
>
I humbly disagree. The standards that I have set to myself for ASDF 2.0
are as follows:
1- improve the ASDF inte
On 2010-04-18, at 00:20 , Faré wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> I think time has come to declare ASDF 2.0 in beta-test, and focus on
> releasing it before we get more features into it.
>
> If there are any bug fixes or improvements you think should definitely
> be in 2.0, please open a bug in launchpad and
