[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: ELPA policy

From: David Engster
Subject: Re: ELPA policy
Date: Sat, 09 May 2020 12:29:22 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.91 (gnu/linux)

>> From: David Engster <address@hidden>
>> Cc: address@hidden,  address@hidden
>> Date: Sat, 09 May 2020 12:13:01 +0200
>> > I could understand if you'd say "use" instead of "recommend",
>> > i.e. have code in Emacs, which, if a package is installed, would use
>> > it.  That'd actually have the package's name in our sources, and would
>> > constitute some kind of "endorsement".  But as long as we don't use
>> > any of those packages, why should we care what other people like or
>> > don't like?
>> Sorry, but you lost me there. All I'm saying is that there's a whole lot
>> of terrific packages out there but which we must not recommend to users,
>> although they are free software and often vastly superior to the things
>> that are built into Emacs. For instance, there's a discussion going on
>> about making a video showing Emacs' capabilities, but I assume we'd not
>> be allowed to show Magit. That's a huge loss.
> So package maintainers are supposed to want to be on ELPA so that they
> could appear in a video, or in someone's message on a GNU mailing
> list?  Really?

No, package maintainers usually don't care. I think this should be in
*our* interest.

> Once again, I wasn't asking whether it was okay or not to show off
> Magit in a video or promote it on this list, I was asking why do we
> need ELPA when MELPA is out there and has many more packages (and
> always will)?

Indeed, one possibility would be to simply close GNU ELPA for everything
but core or maybe-in-the-future-core packages. Is that what you're


reply via email to

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