From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:38232) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iAFlr-0001Ru-Qi for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Sep 2019 11:52:04 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iAFlq-00082F-KQ for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Sep 2019 11:52:03 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:44353) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iAFlq-00082B-H1 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Sep 2019 11:52:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iAFlq-0006eC-BP for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Sep 2019 11:52:02 -0400 Subject: [bug#36467] [PATCH v3] gnu: Add some Common Lisp libraries Resent-Message-ID: From: Katherine Cox-Buday References: <20190701222716.12254-1-glv@posteo.net> <87imr7rak9.fsf@yamatai> <87blw018x7.fsf@gnu.org> <87y2yopqln.fsf@ambrevar.xyz> <87h85ctjoe.fsf@yamatai> <87d0g06zrf.fsf@gnu.org> <87v9tsnn9b.fsf@ambrevar.xyz> Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2019 10:50:55 -0500 In-Reply-To: <87v9tsnn9b.fsf@ambrevar.xyz> (Pierre Neidhardt's message of "Mon, 16 Sep 2019 19:50:56 +0200") Message-ID: <87muf2hqg0.fsf@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-patches" To: Pierre Neidhardt Cc: Guillaume Le Vaillant , 36467@debbugs.gnu.org Pierre Neidhardt writes: > Ludovic Court=C3=A8s writes: > >> We discussed whether to add =E2=80=9Cecl-=E2=80=9D packages in the first= place a couple >> of months ago IIRC, and I think the outcome was that it=E2=80=99s not wo= rth it >> most of the time. Do I remember correctly Katherine, Pierre? > > Hmmm, I don't remember this conversation :p > Do you have a link? This conversation was with me[1]. (Also apologies for not getting back to this. It's on the ever-growing TODO list). > Those ecl- packages come for free, so it's cool to have them for users > using ECL. Admittedly, ECL is way less popular than SBCL, plus the cl- > packages can always be used as a fallback. > So no strong opinion on my end. The point I made in the afforementioned thread was that there is no guarantee that packages will work across the various Lisp runtimes. I think we should be optimistic and include ecl- packages where we can, but I have no problem with authors bailing on them if they don't work and it wasn't the point of their patch. > Either way, I guess this patch is ready to merge then. ECL packages can > always be tweaked later if need be. Thank you, Guilluame, for the submission, Ludovic for maintaining, and Pierre for reviewing and weighing in :) [1] - https://issues.guix.info/issue/36131 --=20 Katherine