Re: ASDF and McCLIM

is the plan to make McCLIM support the new ASDF behavior?

we should probably just revert back to the previous ASDF
(i think it was 1.85 + the *module-provider-functions* hook
for openmcl).

     ...bryan

> The version of ASDF in OpenMCL's current bleeding-edge tree  
> (1.187 ?) seems to have difficulty loading system definitions for  
> McCLIM,
> apparently because file names are used to name components, the current
> ASDF checks for duplicate component names, and McCLIM contains more
> than one file/component named "package".
>
> AFAIK, this isn't OpenMCL-specific; I'm not sure how to best deal
> with this.