Scheme package management Lassi Kortela 25 Apr 2021 15:22 UTC
> I don't think that the package and library namespace should be mixed. +1. However.... > Nor are library names like "(github.com/account/repo foo qux)" very nice, quite the > contrary. If we have generic library name rewriting, we can have our cake and eat it too. So (github.com/account/repo foo qux) is just a library name. _Unless_ we have added a rewrite rule that says to translate any library name part with slashes into a git repo URL. So this: (import (from-package "git://firstname.lastname@example.org:accout/repo.git" (foo qux)) Could be derived from (github.com/account/repo foo qux) using a rewrite rule, something like this: (rewrite-import (github.com/<acctname>/<reponame> <libname> ...) (from-package (string-append "git://email@example.com:" <acctname> "/" <reponame> ".git") <libname> ...)) > And there should be no need to find a single library. If the library can list its own dependencies, it would make perfect sense to find only one. The package manager can chase the dependencies for the user. > Adding one more indirection makes sense here. Of course, there could be > a default mapping that will produce your suggested mapping. Are you thinking of something like the rewrite rule above?