bug#62720: 29.0.60; Not easy at all to upgrade :core packages like Eglot

[Philip Kaludercic]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

>> From: Philip Kaludercic <philipk@posteo.net>
>> Cc: joaotavora@gmail.com,  monnier@iro.umontreal.ca,  62720@debbugs.gnu.org
>> Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2023 11:37:40 +0000
>> 
>> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
>> 
>> >> I have no preference either way.  If you think that package-install is
>> >> fine, and João has expressed interest in that route as well, we might as
>> >> well go that way.
>> >
>> > OK, then let's do that, and thanks.
>> 
>> Great, then just to that we are on the same page, what approach do we
>> finally want to decide on?
>> 
>> - User option to enable upgrading built-in packages
>> - Prefix argument to enable upgrading built-in packages
>> - Always upgrade built-in packages
>
> The first two on emacs-29, the last one on master (if enough people
> think it's a good idea; me, I think we should wait for a while before
> deciding).

OK, so let us use this change:

0001-Allow-upgrading-built-in-packages-with-package-insta.patch
Description: Text Data

(I intentionally picked this one without the user option since that
will probably become unnecessary with Emacs 30+).  I believe there was
an issue with the name `package--upgradable-built-in-p' and the
docstring?

>> I argue the last option should be safe.  Semantically it would also make
>> sense, since invoking the command can be taken to be take to be an
>> explicit request, and if it is not what a user wants (I assume that João
>> think this is not probable), then it is easy to revert.
>> 
>> If we decide that this is not acceptable, then we can fall back onto the
>> patch that uses a prefix argument or a user option.
>
> Yes, that is what I think we should install on emacs-29.
>
> Thanks.

-- 
Philip Kaludercic