Re: [BUG] What about excluding .dir-locals.el from GNU ELPA tarball?

[Morgan Willcock]

Ihor Radchenko <yantar92@posteo.net> writes:

> Lin Jian <me@linj.tech> writes:
>
>> Currently, the .dir-locals.el file is included in the GNU ELPA
>> tarball[1], which causes this compilation error[2] when doing AOT native
>> compilation for Emacs lisp packages in NixOS.
>
> I do not see why anything is wrong on Org side.
> .dir-locals.el is a perfectly valid file that may be created by users as
> well. The fact that they are native-compiled is probably a bug in NixOS
> or a missing feature in Emacs's native compilation (maybe it should skip
> compiling dir locals automatically).

I believe it is up to the file to opt-out of compilation.

If the file is created with add-dir-local-variable there is a boiler
plate header inserted which opts out:

  ;;; Directory Local Variables            -*- no-byte-compile: t -*-
  ;;; For more information see (info "(emacs) Directory Variables")

>> We can workaround this by skipping native compilation for
>> .dir-locals.el.  However, I do not think .dir-locals.el has to be
>> included in the GNU ELPA tarball.  In addition, MELPA ignores[3] that
>> file by default.
>>
>> Could you exclude .dir-locals.el from GNU ELPA tarball?  FYI,
>> :ignored-files[4] of GNU ELPA specification can be used to do this.
>
> Having dir locals file in the tarball can be useful for the users who
> wish to edit Org mode's source code. We set a number of editing defaults
> there that are employed across Org codebase. These defaults make our
> life easier when users create patches by directly modifying Org mode code
> they got via ELPA.
>
> Not a bug.
> Canceled.
>
> I suggest you to report a bug or feature request to Emacs upstream about
> native compiling .dir-locals.el.

I don't think there is any upstream bug.  The solution would be to add
the missing header to the .dir-locals.el file.

-- 
Morgan Willcock