From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Jorgen Schaefer Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#19296: [PATCH] Package archives now have priorities. Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2014 17:10:02 +0100 Message-ID: <20141207171002.31c51d19@forcix> References: <<20141207132244.A14A7200D1E@loki.jorgenschaefer.de> <20141207154316.1f2c5943@forcix> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1417968689 24567 80.91.229.3 (7 Dec 2014 16:11:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2014 16:11:29 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 19296@debbugs.gnu.org To: Drew Adams Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Dec 07 17:11:21 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1XxeQb-0006Tt-Hn for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 07 Dec 2014 17:11:21 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:58338 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XxeQb-0003di-2d for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 07 Dec 2014 11:11:21 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:39117) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XxeQT-0003dQ-NW for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 07 Dec 2014 11:11:18 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XxeQO-0000T7-Na for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 07 Dec 2014 11:11:13 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:59196) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XxeQO-0000T3-KF for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 07 Dec 2014 11:11:08 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XxeQI-0001SY-JH for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 07 Dec 2014 11:11:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Jorgen Schaefer Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2014 16:11:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 19296 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch Original-Received: via spool by 19296-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B19296.14179686085547 (code B ref 19296); Sun, 07 Dec 2014 16:11:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 19296) by debbugs.gnu.org; 7 Dec 2014 16:10:08 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56409 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XxePP-0001RO-7d for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 07 Dec 2014 11:10:07 -0500 Original-Received: from loki.jorgenschaefer.de ([87.230.15.51]:45184) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XxePN-0001RF-9G for 19296@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 07 Dec 2014 11:10:06 -0500 Original-Received: by loki.jorgenschaefer.de (Postfix, from userid 998) id 4145D200D20; Sun, 7 Dec 2014 17:10:04 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from forcix (port-21631.pppoe.wtnet.de [46.59.146.42]) by loki.jorgenschaefer.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 534EF200D1D; Sun, 7 Dec 2014 17:10:03 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.11.1 (GTK+ 2.24.25; i586-pc-linux-gnu) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:96941 Archived-At: On Sun, 7 Dec 2014 07:55:20 -0800 (PST) Drew Adams wrote: > > > Why is that good? Why should MELPA be given a lower priority? > > > > MELPA provides unstable versions of packages. > > Baloney. Please stop pushing this myth. > > MELPA provides *packages*. Whether a package is "stable" or > not, as far as one can tell from the outside, is only something > (optionally) claimed by its developer. MELPA actively discourages package authors to have a "stable" branch in the recipe: https://github.com/milkypostman/melpa/pull/1129#issuecomment-27156539 MELPA strongly prefers "snapshot" releases, and suggests that users use the "MELPA stable" package archive if they do want officially released versions. When I raised this issue in the past, I was told that the "E" in "MELPA" originally stood for "Experimental": https://github.com/milkypostman/melpa/pull/1129#issuecomment-27156209 > Repository priorities can be expressed in a normal way, > using a list or assigning priority values - with *no built-in > prejudice* This patch does not add any built-in prejudice. As the patch description says, this *allows* the user to set it up like that. It does not force anyone to do anything, and does not change default behavior at all. Could I ask you to be a bit more courteous and civil to possible contributors in the future? Thank you. If you require further responses, please do specify in what official capacity you are speaking. I seem unable to find you on the list of maintainers for Emacs. Regards, Jorgen