Talk:Lisp package guidelines
I've added Alexandria to AUR as 'cl-alexandria', because 'alexandria' is already taken by a book collection managing application. It is clear that the directory in /usr/share/common-lisp/ should be named 'alexandria' and not 'cl-alexandria', otherwise code written with it would not be compatible with other distros.
Should we be naming all CL packages with a 'cl-' prefix, or only those that "already" have it (like cl-ppcre and cl-who)?
-- Veox 06:05, 26 March 2009 (EDT)
package name should follow the prefix cl-packagename, but in the directory structure, conserve the original name.
--Djgera 19:41, 28 March 2009 (EDT)
A few comments/questions:
1) Is it unreasonable to require ASDF as a dependency? It would be similar to having `make` as a dependency.
2) With the older version of ASDF, the way to add to the ASDF search path was to (pushnew #p\"/path/to/system/dir/" `asdf:*central-registry* :test #'equal), but this has been replaced by adding a (:directory "/path/to/systems/dir/") entry to a file. According to , Section 7.1 item number 6, the system configuration file /etc/common-lisp/source-registry.conf will be used so the entry (:directory "/usr/share/common-lisp/systems/") could be added to that file. All *.asd files for the packages would still be added to the /usr/share/common-lisp/systems/ directory.
- Note: the creation of the /etc/common-lisp/source-registry.conf file with the :directory entry could be handled by the pkgbuild for ASDF.
1) Is there a conventional place for .xcvb files?
2) Should I do something like make or asdf:complile-op etc... with them?