Re: [Sbcl-devel] Deprecation fallout

[Zach B. <xa...@xa...>]

"Robert P. Goldman" <rpg...@si...> writes:

> Jan Moringen wrote:
>> On Sun, 2015-03-15 at 11:52 -0500, Robert P. Goldman wrote:
>>> Jan Moringen wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 2015-03-12 at 12:48 -0400, Zach Beane wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The failure report is intimidating, with more than 50 systems
>>>>> failing due to the new deprecation full warnings:
>>>>>
>>>>>     http://report.quicklisp.org/2015-03-12/failure-report.html
>>>>>
>>>>> I think fixing a few key libraries would help fix many of the failures,
>>>>> but there's still a lot of fail to go around around.
>>>>>
>>>>> What do you think about a group effort to inform authors of the issues
>>>>> introduced by these deprecation changes?
>>>> Here is a partial list of root causes based on the linked report:
>>>>
>>>>         xmls: quit
>>> I'm the maintainer of record for XMLS.  Here's what it has:
>>>
>>>
>>>   #+sbcl (sb-ext:exit :code 0)
>> 
>> There seems to be a mismatch between the code Zach tried to build and
>> your code. The above code does not signal any deprecation warnings or
>> errors with non-ancient SBCLs.
>
> To be honest, I don't know where Zach gets his copy. 

I get it from http://common-lisp.net/project/xmls/xmls-1.5.tar.gz

>  XMLS does not have a source repository. When Drew (?) was maintaining
> it, we pulled a copy of the source over into my company's SVN repo of
> lisp utilities.  I've put patches onto that version and pushed
> tarballs to the cl.net page.

The cl.net page says 1.5 is the latest. Is that really the case? If not,
where can I get the new version?

> I understand Xach's preference for source repository, but I don't have
> the energy to maintain a separate, public source repo. I think CXML is
> more popular than XMLS these days, anyway.

I don't prefer a source repository, in general.

Zach