[racket-dev] PLaneT(2): Single vs multi-collection packages

Agreed. This looks good.
-Ian
----- Original Message -----
From: "Carl Eastlund" <cce at ccs.neu.edu>
To: "Matthew Flatt" <mflatt at cs.utah.edu>
Cc: dev at racket-lang.org
Sent: Friday, June 14, 2013 10:42:06 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: Re: [racket-dev] PLaneT(2): Single vs multi-collection packages



I vote for this change. I'll happily update my package in order to make it easier for others to contribute new ones. 



Carl Eastlund 


On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 10:07 AM, Matthew Flatt < mflatt at cs.utah.edu > wrote: 


I think more people need to speak up on this question --- particularly 
authors of existing packages, since the current proposal necessitates 
an update to each existing package. 

The proposal is to make single-package collections the default: 

* If a directory used as a package has no "info.rkt" file, then it is 
treated as a single-collection package. 

The single collection's name is the same as the package name (which 
tends to be the directory name, but it depends on how you install 
the package). 

* If a directory used as a package has an "info.rkt" file, but 
"info.rkt" doesn't explicitly say that the package is 
multi-collection, then it's still a single-collection package. 

The "info.rkt" file might supply a name for the single collection, 
instead of leaving it to the package name; supplying a name would be 
a requirement for ring-0 packages. 

For each existing package, the author would need to add a line to the 
package's "info.rkt" to indicate that it is a multi-collection package 
(or change the layout to single-collection mode, with the caveat that 
the package won't work with v5.3.4). 

Any more votes for/against? 



_________________________ 
Racket Developers list: 
http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev 


_________________________
  Racket Developers list:
  http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev