[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: package autoload
From: |
Olaf Till |
Subject: |
Re: package autoload |
Date: |
Fri, 15 Apr 2016 17:24:55 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) |
On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 02:55:47PM +0200, address@hidden wrote:
> Removal of autoload will (hopefully) have one big advantage: That people add
> “pkg load” commands at the beginning of their script files. This will make
> the script files portable(*) and other users can easily tell that they miss
> a particular package if the script stops right at the start on their
> computer.
Without trying to abort the discussion, I'd like to say that this
convinces me to a sufficient degree.
And thanks to all who took the time to respond.
An afterthought (occured to me thinking about this all): I'd say at
least within OF, packages should usually try to avoid name conflicts
(except when deliberately overriding something). With a central list
of names, e.g.. It was only meant as a hint -- if you like to discuss
it, better start a new thread.
Olaf
--
public key id EAFE0591, e.g. on x-hkp://pool.sks-keyservers.net
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature