[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#62750: 29.0.50; Commands 'package-update' and 'package-update-all' s
From: |
Stefan Monnier |
Subject: |
bug#62750: 29.0.50; Commands 'package-update' and 'package-update-all' should be called '*-upgrade' |
Date: |
Sun, 30 Apr 2023 21:55:17 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) |
> That might also be the case when upgrading a package that some others
> depend on (newer version could also have macros deleted or renamed).
We try to make upgrades "safe", but there's usually no such effort the
other way around, so downgrading is definitely more risky in practice,
even though in theory things can break in all cases.
> Would "update" be a more proper term to cover both upgrading and
> downgrading?
I think if you specify the target version, then `package-install` sounds
about right (and I suspect it may already "work").
> Or that. We don't keep older versions around in ELPA anyway, so for
> now the question is moot.
Well, we do keep them some `elpa.gnu.org` but indeed the ELPA protocol
doesn't include any way to advertise them.
Stefan
- bug#62750: 29.0.50; Commands 'package-update' and 'package-update-all' should be called '*-upgrade', (continued)
- bug#62750: 29.0.50; Commands 'package-update' and 'package-update-all' should be called '*-upgrade', Stefan Monnier, 2023/04/12
- bug#62750: 29.0.50; Commands 'package-update' and 'package-update-all' should be called '*-upgrade', Eli Zaretskii, 2023/04/12
- bug#62750: 29.0.50; Commands 'package-update' and 'package-update-all' should be called '*-upgrade', Stefan Monnier, 2023/04/12
- bug#62750: 29.0.50; Commands 'package-update' and 'package-update-all' should be called '*-upgrade', Dmitry Gutov, 2023/04/14
- bug#62750: 29.0.50; Commands 'package-update' and 'package-update-all' should be called '*-upgrade', Dmitry Gutov, 2023/04/23
- bug#62750: 29.0.50; Commands 'package-update' and 'package-update-all' should be called '*-upgrade', Eli Zaretskii, 2023/04/24
- bug#62750: 29.0.50; Commands 'package-update' and 'package-update-all' should be called '*-upgrade', Adam Porter, 2023/04/24
- bug#62750: 29.0.50; Commands 'package-update' and 'package-update-all' should be called '*-upgrade', Dmitry Gutov, 2023/04/24
- bug#62750: 29.0.50; Commands 'package-update' and 'package-update-all' should be called '*-upgrade', Eli Zaretskii, 2023/04/24
- bug#62750: 29.0.50; Commands 'package-update' and 'package-update-all' should be called '*-upgrade', Dmitry Gutov, 2023/04/24
- bug#62750: 29.0.50; Commands 'package-update' and 'package-update-all' should be called '*-upgrade',
Stefan Monnier <=
- bug#62750: 29.0.50; Commands 'package-update' and 'package-update-all' should be called '*-upgrade', Philip Kaludercic, 2023/04/12
- bug#62750: 29.0.50; Commands 'package-update' and 'package-update-all' should be called '*-upgrade', João Távora, 2023/04/12
- bug#62750: 29.0.50; Commands 'package-update' and 'package-update-all' should be called '*-upgrade', Jim Porter, 2023/04/19
bug#62750: 29.0.50; Commands 'package-update' and 'package-update-all' should be called '*-upgrade', Dmitry Gutov, 2023/04/27