Re: [Emacs-diffs] feature/integrated-elpa 4f6df43 15/23: README added

[Phillip Lord]

Alain Schneble <address@hidden> writes:

> address@hidden (Phillip Lord) writes:
>
>> a)
>>
>> EMACS/lisp/blah.el
>> EMACS/packages/foo/foo.el
>         ^^^^^^^^
> What about elpa instead of packages?  It's 4 chars as 'lisp'.


There is already confusion between "ELPA" the web server, "ELPA" as in
any package server and "ELPA" as in the package.el format. I'm trying
not to make this worse.

>> which is nice because it cleanly separates out the two layouts.
>>
>> b)
>>
>> EMACS/lisp/elpa/packages/foo/foo.el
>                   ^^^^^^^^
> elpa would suffice, I think.  Or is there a reason for the nested
> packages directory?
>>
>> Or c)
>>
>> EMACS/lisp/blah.el
>> EMACS/lisp/elpa/packages/foo/foo.el
>                   ^^^^^^^^
> Same here.


Screw up. I would use EMACS/lisp/packages in both cases.

Phil