[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Allowing rolling release packages on ELPA
From: |
Philip Kaludercic |
Subject: |
Re: Allowing rolling release packages on ELPA |
Date: |
Wed, 26 Oct 2022 15:27:26 +0000 |
Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes:
>>> More importantly, it would be good to notice when that flag is out of
>>> date, i.e. signal an error if the `Version:` has changed when that flag
>>> is set. Maybe simply require that flag to be set to a string (rather
>>> than just `t`) which is the expected version specified in `Version:` and
>>> then signal an error if they don't agree?
>>
>> Sure, that can be done but I don't see why?
>
> Because more often than I'd like, upstream management changes without us
> being made aware of them. So especially for discouraged flags, we should
> make extra sure that these flags are still desired.
I see. Sure, I'll try and update the patch for that to work as well.
Re: Allowing rolling release packages on ELPA, Stefan Monnier, 2022/10/24
Re: Allowing rolling release packages on ELPA, Richard Stallman, 2022/10/25
Re: Allowing rolling release packages on ELPA, Payas Relekar, 2022/10/26