Yesterday, Jay McCarthy wrote:
Planet attempts to solve this problem technically by (a) having all
collections be prefixed by author/package-name and (b) mandating
a centralized server that enforces unique authors and unique
package-names per author. Since Racket packages don't have a
The problem with that is that there is no way to ensure that there is
only one package named data/red-black-tree and there can be two
mutually incompatible universes of packages for Carl's rbts and mine,
for instance. Furthermore, it has the internal linking problem.
On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 7:11
Just now, Jay McCarthy wrote:
The problem with that is that there is no way to ensure that there
is only one package named data/red-black-tree
There's no need to ensure such a thing -- and IIUC, the current system
doesn't do that neither modulo a bunch of blessed packages.
and there can be
It seems to me our new package system runs into trouble if two people write
packages that use the same connection name. Let's say we have two
packages, alice-tree and bob-tree, both of which provide the collection
data/red-black-tree, but both provide different interfaces (perhaps similar
On Sun, Jul 7, 2013 at 11:44 AM, Carl Eastlund c...@ccs.neu.edu wrote:
It seems to me our new package system runs into trouble if two people write
packages that use the same connection name. Let's say we have two packages,
alice-tree and bob-tree, both of which provide the collection
5 matches
Mail list logo
