Re: feature/integrated-elpa 4f6df43 15/23: README added

[Phillip Lord]

Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:

>> From: Alain Schneble <address@hidden>
>> CC: Phillip Lord <address@hidden>, <address@hidden>,
>>      <address@hidden>
>> Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2016 11:31:11 +0200
>> 
>> I think that regenerating *-loaddefs as Eli pointed out will solve the
>> effective issue at hand.  What's not covered though is that it might
>> still be possible to explicitly load/require an old file that is no
>> longer there in the new version - e.g. (load "org-html") using the
>> example given by Phillip.
>
> The new version of Org will never do that.  So you are talking about
> other packages that were not yet updated to follow suit, is that
> right?  If so, is such explicit loading allowed?  If it's allowed,
> it's a separate problem of dependencies between packages, and should
> exist with any arrangement of directories, I think.


org has many add on packages, which do use explicit "require" forms to
internal packages (if, for example, they extend an existing org
backend).

What I would expect is that an explicit (require 'org-html) would fail
(i.e. report an error) when upgrading org to a version that does not
include org-html. What actually happens is org-html from the old version
gets loaded.

load-path shadowing is I think, an ineffective mechanism for isolation
between versions. Deleting old versions would work but not for core,
admin installed, packages and is not-revertable. Removing old versions
from load-path is clean and the best solution, which is why package.el
uses is.

Phil