[racket-dev] haskell's 'hell of a lot of libraries', planet

On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 1:09 AM, Stephen De Gabrielle <
stephen.degabrielle at acm.org> wrote:

>
> It's not to early to think about an expanded set of categories
>

One idea is to allow module writers to add to the categories or tags so it
becomes a decentralized process, like how blogs do it these days.

On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 6:41 AM, Matthias Felleisen <matthias at ccs.neu.edu>
 wrote:

>
> On Jul 28, 2010, at 12:26 AM, YC wrote:
>
> > Other package systems separate the installation step from the import step
>
> Indeed, this is the key design decision separating us from the rest of the
> world, and it is not clear whether it was a good decision.


I personally like the design except for the issues I've raised so far, but
the disadvantage can be remedied by unifying the require spec syntax between
collects and planet.

On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 7:03 AM, Dave Gurnell <d.j.gurnell at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> I'd also like to be able to set up a PLaneT proxy to add in-house libraries
> in on the top of publicly available libraries from planet.racket-lang.com
> .
>

See my bzlib/planet package.  This is an example where I would like to see
the core team take advantage of what's available on planet directly instead
of porting it into core.

On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 8:20 AM, Neil Van Dyke <neil at neilvandyke.org> wrote:

>
> Most important for me, I'd like to be able to define multiple (what I'll
> call for now) repositories (like Debian "apt").


FWIW - bzlib/planet is designed for you to facilitate having your own
internal packages now.  When multi-repo becomes  available, you can still
use bzlib/planet to host your own repo.

On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 7:03 AM, Dave Gurnell <d.j.gurnell at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> I'd personally be in favour of a leaner core distribution with more code in
> external packages, so I can choose what I download when I'm only interested
> in a single web application.
>

Once the collects and planet require syntax are unified - moving the
currently-core packages to planet will become a snap. At that time it might
even be possible to have "build your own distribution" by picking your own
packages.

On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 8:20 AM, Neil Van Dyke <neil at neilvandyke.org> wrote:

>
> Then, somehow I would like to prevent packages in the contributed
> repository from overriding those in the core and internal repositories.
>  Guaranteeing this through naming, like Java packages, is one way, though
> that could be cumbersome.
>

Now I think about it, it might make sense to have local repo able to
overwrite core repo in case you want to "patch" the core code.  In that case
the module resolve I proposed earlier would have to be changed to:

   1. Try lookup the package in planet cache
   2. If #1 fails, lookup in COLLECTS
   3. If #2 fails, try lookup the package in planet repo

On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 8:20 AM, Neil Van Dyke <neil at neilvandyke.org> wrote:

>
> Package signing to authenticate the packager still seems useful, like it
> did in the beginning, but that could be revisited in context of whatever
> other improvements are made.
>

I like what ASDF has to offer here.  The only thing I would add is that this
auth mechanism should be optional (perhaps as a policy per repo).

All my additional 2 cents.  Cheers,
yc
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev/archive/attachments/20100728/283e2428/attachment.html>