[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: ELPA policy

From: Dmitry Gutov
Subject: Re: ELPA policy
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2015 05:51:16 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:42.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/42.0

On 11/09/2015 05:42 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:

Imagine someone implements an awesome new feature for dired.  Emacs
users the world over are amazed by this, and fill their blogs, twitter,
etc. with the news.  If dired is an ELPA package, everyone who hears
this news can get the new feature in their emacs instantly by upgrading
their ELPA packages.  No need to wait N months for a new release of
emacs, or compile a non-release version of emacs from git.

How is this different when Dired is in the Emacs repository?  The
Emacs repository is a public one, so anyone and everyone can get the
latest version from there and use it, if they want.

a) That's a more involved endeavor than installing a package from ELPA. And then you don't get the same conveniences, such as automatic updates.

b) There's a much higher probability that Dired depends on something only the current development version of Emacs has. ELPA packages declare their version requirements explicitly, and try not to break compatibility with earlier versions without sufficient reasons.

The suggestion was to move _all_ of them, except the few that are
needed for bootstrap, out of the Emacs repository.  Most of the
packages in that category are neither like Org nor like kermit.  They
are relatively small, but get quite a significant number of changes.

There were different suggestions, with different degrees between "let's move Org and Gnus out" and "let's move everything out".

reply via email to

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