Re: SQL on CMUCL/SBCL and Debian

[email protected] wrote:

>Hmm Adam,
>
>i just had a look at the Debian bugtracker and realized that 
>there's a bugreport filed against UncommonSQL -- the same bug
>i reported on the mailing list quite a while ago. Since i _did_
>submit a patch both against upstream and the debian source package
>i really don't see why you didn't answer Philip Miller. This bug
>could easliy be closed  .....
>Just for the record (and because i send a CC to Philip) - patches
>can be found at:
>
> <http://cvs.zeit.de/>
>
>  
>
I am currently working with the debian maintainer to take over packaging 
duties for uncommonsql.  I'm working off the 1.2.1 source, which 
apparently is quite far removed from the latest released version, but 
its a start.  I'm getting incomplete messages from the upstream 
maintainers, so I'm unsure if a fork is in order, or if they are giving 
up the package to outside maintainers.  In either case, I'll hopefully 
be setting up a project on common-lisp.net for future development of the 
free software version of uncommonsql (though the name may have to change 
in the case of a fork...we'll see what the onShore folks say).

In any case, I'm nearly finished with a repackaging/reordering of the 
uncommonsql packages to distribute to debian.  I've reorganized the 
source files slightly and ported the system definition from defsystem to 
asdf.  Also, in light of Ralf's message, I've added his sbcl patches (I 
haven't had a chance to test it yet, though).  I hope to upload these 
packages to unstable by the end of the week.  Once this is done, I would 
love to work with Edi and any others on porting the codebase to cl-sql, 
and just pushing UncommonSQL ahead in general.

Anthony W. Juckel

ps.  It's somewhat odd to see all this renewed interest in UncommonSQL 
suddenly.  This mailing list has been rather dead for some time.  It is 
heartening to see at least some of a community sprout around the project 
though.