Kaelin Colclasure writes:
> May I explicitly ask about guidelines for what the maintainers do and
> do *not* want it the CLOCC?
The README says most of it.
* Common Lisp, i.e. runs in ANSI CL implementations,
= We don't want Scheme or EuLisp or Emacs-Lisp code (unless it can
be emulated in CL).
* Free Software, according to the Debian Free Software Guidelines
(e.g. licensed under GPL, LGPL, MIT or BSD licenses, or public domain),
= We don't want non-free software.
* Portable, i.e. should be portable among CL implementations with low
effort, and does not require modifications to the CL implementation
= We don't want code that is tied to a particular implementation.
* Self-contained, i.e. does not require packages not in this repository,
* Ready to use, i.e. runs out of the box in the Free CL implementations.
= We don't want code which relies on packages which the user would need
to fetch from elsewhere.
> For example, Sunil Mishra and I maintain the HTML Parser package from
> the CL-HTTP distribution. It is ported to a wide variety of CLs.
What is its copyright? If it is under the general CL-HTTP copyright, then
it is not usable for CLOCC. But if you and Sunil Mishra are the sole
copyright holders and are willing to put that piece under an open license,
it will be *VERY* welcome. Is it based on SGML and DTDs, or is it more
syntax error tolerant?
> We also have a package of FFI bindings to the expat XML parser that
> is ACL specific -- at least until someone ports it to e.g. CLISP's FFI.
expat is nice, but FFI is causing too much portability problems. It is
better to find another way to use expat from within Lisp - maybe in a
less C and more MOP like way (one CLOS instance per tag, one CLOS slot