[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: PL support

From: Eli Zaretskii
Subject: Re: PL support
Date: Mon, 11 May 2020 21:40:16 +0300

> From: Stefan Monnier <address@hidden>
> Cc: Dmitry Gutov <address@hidden>,  address@hidden,  address@hidden,
>   address@hidden
> Date: Mon, 11 May 2020 14:05:57 -0400
> The way I see it, currently Emacs de-facto recommends to most of its
> users to add MELPA to their `package-archives`.

No, we do nothing of the kind.  Just because everybody and their dog
know what MELPA is and how to configure Emacs to use it, doesn't mean
_we_ told them.  Exactly like we don't "recommend" using MS-Windows,
although quite a few of Emacs users do, witness the discussions on
Reddit as one example.

Anything that Emacs doesn't do OOTB the users who need that will go
out and find a way of doing it.  But it doesn't mean we "recommended"
that, it just means we don't (yet) have a solution for that problem

> Now, I actually think MELPA is pretty good (modulo the few packages in
> it which end up recommending/advertizing proprietary tools), so maybe
> a better solution is to be honest about this de-facto situation and
> actually add MELPA to the default value of `package-archives`.

Why in the world is that important?  Configuring Emacs to work with
MELPA is exceedingly simple, and the way to do that for any random
SITE is in the manual.  Why would anyone need that we say the M-word??


I still don't understand the motivation.  I cannot understand why we
need to argue and quarrel so much on behalf of some site about which
everyone already knows.  Why does it matter to anyone that the word
"MELPA" is written in some place in our docs?  It all seems a waste of
breath to me.

reply via email to

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