Re: [STUMP] [PATCH] Use exclusively ASDF to load StumpWM modules

[David Bjergaard]

"Diogo F. S. Ramos" <address@hidden> writes:

>> Is there no way to metadata to an ASDF package that identifies it as
>> a Stump system? For example, a dependency on the :stumpwm package?
>>
>> Is there no way to add some if it does not exist?
>
> You can certainly declare a system dependency.
>
> I'm not sure how to map over all systems reachable by ASDF and query it
> for a specific dependency.  Or maybe extend the system definition to
> accommodate a new field which identifies it as a StumpWM module.
>
> And this might not be necessary.
>
> As StumpWM is today, one can use the contrib approach with ASDF and ASDF
> multiple locations.  When using the latter, the module does not show up
> when tabbing completing `load-module' nor you can `load-module' it, but
> you can load a system as you would any ASDF system.
>
I'm really supportive of leveraging ASDF to load code. However, I don't
want to sacrifice the user's experience.  Having a way to tab complete
stumpwm-declared modules with load-module/list-modules is one feature
that's required.

As far as contrib-dir/load-path the only requirement there is that a
clean and easy way of adding new asdf locations.  If that's a wrapper
function, great! If its very clear documentation, great!

Thanks for your time researching this issue.  If you look back in the
archives a few months, we discussed modules at length, and I did my best
to implement the conclusion of those discussions. That doesn't mean my
implementation doesn't need improving! More work and patches are very
welcome.

Cheers,

    Dave