[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: package and testing rant (was Re: package.el, auto-installation, and

From: Stefan Monnier
Subject: Re: package and testing rant (was Re: package.el, auto-installation, and auto-removal)
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2014 17:40:34 -0500
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.50 (gnu/linux)

> And if they were savannah gnu projects that would be achieved without
> the over centralization you have now.

No: many (most?) savannah gnu projects don't require copyright assignments.
Also, when maintainers disappear, it's rather problematic to get bugs fixed.

> The centralization isn't really a problem right now you think.  But I bet
> it is.  You're making people work inside a source tree that doesn't
> belong to them and you're constraining the technical content they put
> there.

That depends on what you compare it with.  You're comparing it to having
your package on some random Git server somewhere, but if you compare it
to having your package in Emacs itself, then it's much more "your"
source tree, and it has fewer constraints.

> You're also inviting people to break the Makefile because they want
> their own build.

I don't know what you mean by that.

> You're also inviting people to check in non-working code.

How?  Are you referring to "distributing tarballs without testing them"?

> I think that's my main point.  There should be a package archive where
> authors send their "done" packages.

I'd accept patches to the GNU ELPA scripts which lets authors do that.
Note that I've heard comments from other authors who find the "just bump
the version number" way of making a release to be really handy, so
I wouldn't want to force people to make their own archive.

> But I also think you are wrong about requiring everyone to use one
> source archive.  Just because you want one place where the source
> is.  I've heard no good justification for that.

As I said, it could be a tree of repositories.  I have limited time to
spend writing those GNU ELPA scripts, so I did it in the way that seemed
the easiest for me.

As long as I can get a Git checkout of all of them in one "make"
command, and that any Emacs maintainer can commit to them from there
without having to go and chase the "upstream repository/maintainer" du
jour, another organization would probably work just as well.

> I mean: You're doing something very weird. Why?

I guess I just don't know what's weird about it.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]