Re: [STUMP] Please consider removing module.lisp.in.

[Ben Spencer]

On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 04:06:32AM +0800, Desmond O. Chang wrote:
> Since most of implementations already included asdf2, bundled asdf has
> been unnecessary, although leaving it is harmless.  I never use it.

clisp does not, unless things have changed.  I believe this was the
original reason for including it.  That said, the README recommends
installing asdf first anyway so you can use asdf-install to get
dependencies.

A Quicklisp-based install process would allow us to get rid of this
and related warts like the need to tell configure where to find
cl-ppcre.


> This proposal is not only for quicklisp, but also for other installers
> (although only a few people use them), even manual installation.

Sure, it's just an asdf system and you can install it however you
like.  But we need a proven (for various setups), easy to follow
process for the README that works for people with no existing lisp
infrastructure.


Ben