[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: A proposal for removing obsolete packages

From: Andrés Ramírez
Subject: Re: A proposal for removing obsolete packages
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 15:38:05 -0500


What about byte-compilation.
Does obsolete packages should be byte-compiled when compiling emacs?

On Wed, 20 Jan 2016 14:52:20 -0500,
John Wiegley wrote:
> [1  <text/plain (quoted-printable)>]
> >>>>> Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:
> > As long as the removal is not done by a program, but by humans, I think
> > considering each candidate before producing the list is a reasonable
> > compromise.
> Right. I imagine that even without such a list, the process will look
> something like this:
>   1. Core developer looks at bug.
>   2. Sees it is in "obsolete" code.
>   3. Sees it has been "obsolete" for a while.
>   4. Asks list, "Hey, can I just delete this code and the bug?"
>   5. Hears deafening applause of consent.
>   6. Happiness is restored.
> Our biggest complaint about obsolete code is not its existence, but having to
> tend to it; and so, this new policy gives us a way to do decisively deal with
> it after a certain period of time.
> Likewise, if an obsolete file never has any bugs, I'm not opposed to letting
> it stay in "obsolete" forever. And yet, if someone requests that it be removed
> after the appropriate amount of time, that's OK too.
> The point is that we get to decide, not a mechanistic process, in the case
> that someone knows of a good reason to keep that code around for a few
> releases more.
> -- 
> John Wiegley                  GPG fingerprint = 4710 CF98 AF9B 327B B80F
> http://newartisans.com                          60E1 46C4 BD1A 7AC1 4BA2
> [2 signature.asc <application/pgp-signature (7bit)>]
> No public key for C144D8F4F19FE630 created at 2016-01-20T14:52:20-0500 using 

reply via email to

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