From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Greg Troxel Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: Future of ice-9/slib.scm. Date: 16 Nov 2005 10:38:32 -0500 Message-ID: References: <878xvpupx0.fsf@trouble.defaultvalue.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1132159386 7085 80.91.229.2 (16 Nov 2005 16:43:06 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 16:43:06 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Nov 16 17:42:57 2005 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EcQHw-00028q-FG for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 16 Nov 2005 17:37:38 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EcQHu-0007yC-LU for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 16 Nov 2005 11:37:34 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1EcPNw-0005IL-1H for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 16 Nov 2005 10:39:44 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1EcPNX-0005CV-6T for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 16 Nov 2005 10:39:42 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EcPNW-0005CI-G2 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 16 Nov 2005 10:39:18 -0500 Original-Received: from [192.1.100.210] (helo=fnord.ir.bbn.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_3DES_EDE_CBC_SHA:24) (Exim 4.34) id 1EcPNV-0007Mk-80 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 16 Nov 2005 10:39:17 -0500 Original-Received: by fnord.ir.bbn.com (Postfix, from userid 10853) id 872E85286; Wed, 16 Nov 2005 10:38:32 -0500 (EST) Original-To: Rob Browning In-Reply-To: <878xvpupx0.fsf@trouble.defaultvalue.org> Original-Lines: 30 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.4 X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:5396 Archived-At: How important is it that 1.6's behavior with respect to older versions of SLIB (versions that already worked) remain unchanged? Certainly someone already using guile 1.6.7 successfully with some older version of SLIB might not be happy if 1.6.8 no longer worked with their SLIB install. A good question. While I'm generally in favor of backwards compatibility, I suspect that people tend to upgrade slib without a lot of issues (other than this one). One very strict way to approach this would be to do something like this in ice-9/slib.scm: (if (detect-older-slib?) (load-from-path "old-slib.scm") (load-from-slib "guile.init")) An easier approach is to put in the if, but with *use-old-slib-init*, define that to #f, and put in NEWS to set that to #t if trouble. That gives people a low-grief way to recover, but without a lot of guile maintainer time. I would expect that as long as the older slib version has the define->define-public hack then the guile.init that came with it would work fine. -- Greg Troxel _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel