[racket-dev] should package "X" imply package "X-test"?

At Tue, 15 Oct 2013 22:40:54 -0400, Eli Barzilay wrote:
> Just now, Robby Findler wrote:
> > Yes, I think that was the point of the original message: to figure out what
> > consistent thing we think it should be.
> 
> My point was in the "depending on what *I* generally want".  I'm
> saying that it much better to leave it consistent per some user
> choice, since there are different types of users; in contrast to
> finding some global default that would work for everyone.  (Since I
> believe there isn't such a default.)

I agree with that goal, but I don't see a way to get there in the near
future.


> > On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 9:34 PM, Eli Barzilay <eli at barzilay.org> wrote:
> > 
> >     It would be nice if it implied some consistent default, depending on
> >     what I generally want.  Ie, I can be someone who just want the minimum
> >     -libs, or someone who always wants everything including the -tests.
> 
> -- 
>           ((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x)))          Eli Barzilay:
>                     http://barzilay.org/                   Maze is Life!