[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [ELPA] New package: use-package

From: Philip Kaludercic
Subject: Re: [ELPA] New package: use-package
Date: Sat, 05 Nov 2022 10:36:01 +0000

Payas Relekar <relekarpayas@gmail.com> writes:

> Philip Kaludercic <philipk@posteo.net> writes:
>>>> 1. Get use-package in ELPA
>>>> 2. Complete all documentation
>>>> 3. Prepare documentation in texinfo
>>>>    Will cross that bridge when 2 is done.
>> While we are at it, is there a rationale for this order?  I mean, there
>> is no hurry, right? My misunderstanding was that the order was 2 -> 3 ->
>> 1.  Or are you planning to have use-package ready for Emacs 29?
> If you mean merging use-package into emacs.git, that will definitely not
> be happening (at least if I'm the only one working on it).


> As for the order rationale, getting use-package to ELPA means less
> friction and more users can try it out, more feedback, more eyeballs,
> basically.

What are we trying to find?  From what I know use-package is already a
very mature package, written by very capable people.  I expect most of
the changes to be made after use-package.el has been added to the core.

> Ultimate aim here is to make use-package to emacs.git, so users have
> use-package available without any effort. ELPA is just a step in that
> direction.
> 1 -> 2 -> 3 is also how Eglot went about and it worked quite well for it.

Yes, but the arrow between points 2 and 3 would have to be pretty long.
Eglot was an ELPA package from the very beginning, and I don't know if
the documentation was ever as incomplete as it is for use-package right
now.  The rewrite into Texinfo (which is probably what I had confused)
took place just before the package was merged into the core.
use-package will now be added to GNU ELPA with _incomplete_ Texinfo
documentation.  This is my objection.  An outdated manual with "TODO"s
can be more frustrating than no documentation at all.

> From my understanding, ELPA has less stringent requirements for
> documentation and testing compared to core. Since I cannot commit enough
> time to complete all the tasks before expected 29 branch-off, ELPA is a
> good compromise IMO.

Most packages on ELPA don't have any special documentation, most don't
need any documentation either.  Use-package is more complicated, 

reply via email to

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