Re: Improving GNU ELPA

[Phillip Lord]

Stefan Monnier <address@hidden> writes:

>> If I could push to upstream, it would be simpler, but still require
>> merges.
>
> AFAIU, what you mean by "merges" is simply the result of changes being
> made both to the github repository and to the elpa.git repository.
> It's unrelated to how the copy of dash kept on the gnu.org side is
> stored (a subtree, or a separate branchm or a separate repository) as
> long as it can be modified on the gnu.org side.
>
> Right?

I think so, yes. I've never used subtrees. Orphan branches in a repo are
essentially the same as a separate repo except that they share a
namespace for branches and tags. So, I guess, with a separate repo you
could do things like make a feature branch and then PR for this
upstream.

But in terms of use, not modifying the gnu.org side (except in
exceptional circumstances) would make the use of ELPA with an upstream
repo easier. ELPA would, effectively, operate like Jonas' emacsmirror;
there in case the upstream disappeared.

Phil