Lisp team: Should we package Quicklisp?

Lisp team: Should we package Quicklisp?

[jgart]

Hi, what do you think if we package Quicklisp?

For example, we have emacs-straight packaged which is a purely functional package manager for the Emacs hacker that is not Guix.

I think it could be convenient to have.

https://www.quicklisp.org/

Re: Lisp team: Should we package Quicklisp?

[Guillaume Le Vaillant]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 614 bytes --]

"jgart" <jgart@dismail.de> skribis:

> Hi, what do you think if we package Quicklisp?
>
> For example, we have emacs-straight packaged which is a purely functional package manager for the Emacs hacker that is not Guix.
>
> I think it could be convenient to have.
>
> https://www.quicklisp.org/

Hi.
Do you mean making a package containing the "quicklisp.lisp" file at
[1] and letting the users use it themselves to bootstrap their Quicklisp
installation, or do you think of doing something else with some of the
repositories at [2]?

[1] https://beta.quicklisp.org/quicklisp.lisp
[2] https://github.com/quicklisp/

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 247 bytes --]