Discussion:
releasing a first quicklisp package
(too old to reply)
Wolfgang Agnes
2024-10-22 15:49:54 UTC
Permalink
I wrote a couple of Common Lisp packages, one very small and a larger
one that contains procedures for an Internet service. How should I
organize them to be in a quicklisp package? Should I make two quicklisp
packages? (I'd say no---one is too small to matter as a package.)

Is it okay for two packages to form a single quicklisp package? How do
you guys decide such things?

Also, the larger package is not quite a package---it's really just the
set of procedures that I need for the service. It's not likely that
someone would use these packages except to run the Internet service. In
other words, I intend to use quicklisp as a way to easily install the
software. Is that okay?

My plan for the installation of the service is to write a program that
invokes quicklisp to download the packages and then create all the files
necessary to run the service in a certain installation directly. In
other words, the sysadmin would install and have the service ready to
run with a single command. The procedure that would do such preparation
would be in the Common Lisp package that quicklisp will download and
install.

I'd appreciate hearing the best practices. Thanks!
Ralph Schleicher
2024-10-31 10:43:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wolfgang Agnes
My plan for the installation of the service is to write a program that
invokes quicklisp to download the packages and then create all the files
necessary to run the service in a certain installation directly. In
other words, the sysadmin would install and have the service ready to
run with a single command. The procedure that would do such preparation
would be in the Common Lisp package that quicklisp will download and
install.
So you presume the target system has a properly configured Common
Lisp system installed? If so, why don't you just ship the source
code together with the installation script so that you do not have
to download anything? Otherwise, ever though about shipping a
pre-built standalone executable file instead?
--
Ralph
Wolfgang Agnes
2024-10-31 11:17:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ralph Schleicher
Post by Wolfgang Agnes
My plan for the installation of the service is to write a program that
invokes quicklisp to download the packages and then create all the files
necessary to run the service in a certain installation directly. In
other words, the sysadmin would install and have the service ready to
run with a single command. The procedure that would do such preparation
would be in the Common Lisp package that quicklisp will download and
install.
So you presume the target system has a properly configured Common
Lisp system installed?
Yes, I do.
Post by Ralph Schleicher
If so, why don't you just ship the source code together with the
installation script so that you do not have to download anything?
I could have people clone a git repository and then say "make install".
Something like that is what you have in mind? I think that would work
well. But I also want to release a quicklisp package because I
primarily have Common Lisp developers in mind.
Post by Ralph Schleicher
Otherwise, ever though about shipping a pre-built standalone
executable file instead?
As a second step---once I have a homepage set up, for instance. I'd
build executables for popular systems.
Ralph Schleicher
2024-10-31 16:48:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wolfgang Agnes
But I also want to release a quicklisp package because I
primarily have Common Lisp developers in mind.
Sorry, here I misinterpreted your original post. I thought you
want to install an application on a production machine.
--
Ralph
Loading...