* bug#63536: Feature Request
2023-05-16 11:39 ` bug#63536: Feature Request Andrew Goh via Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors
@ 2023-05-16 15:46 ` Eli Zaretskii
[not found] ` <2050007547.2204916.1684290974957@mail.yahoo.com>
2023-05-17 14:04 ` Payas Relekar
` (2 subsequent siblings)
3 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2023-05-16 15:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Goh; +Cc: 63536
severity 63536 wishlist
thanks
> Date: Tue, 16 May 2023 11:39:56 +0000 (UTC)
> From: Andrew Goh via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs,
> the Swiss army knife of text editors" <bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org>
>
> Could we have a "update function" feature to keep emacs current.
Maybe. But please describe what would such a function do...
> Seriously, I would prefer reading a real gnu emacs manual rather than a online version.
...and how would it be relevant to which version of the manual you
will read.
Thanks.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* bug#63536: Feature Request
2023-05-16 11:39 ` bug#63536: Feature Request Andrew Goh via Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors
2023-05-16 15:46 ` Eli Zaretskii
@ 2023-05-17 14:04 ` Payas Relekar
2023-05-17 17:16 ` Eli Zaretskii
2023-05-17 15:40 ` Payas Relekar
2023-05-17 15:51 ` Payas Relekar
3 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Payas Relekar @ 2023-05-17 14:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Eli Zaretskii; +Cc: 63536, Andrew Goh
Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
> So you want a command to check whether a newer Emacs is available?
> But where should this command look? Many (most?) people install
> precompiled binaries prepared by their distros, and I assume those
> distros have their "check for updates" service or something?
>
> We could check on the GNU FTP site, but how many users will want to
> download and build Emacs from sources?
>
> What do other people think about this?
The idea itself is valid, as long as the update check happens only at
explicit user action. The command should only compare current version of
Emacs with the latest update and inform user about the difference. Then
the onus is on user to proceed with the update. Command output can point
them to relevant section of the manual, informing of ways to install
(and also update) Emacs.
Optionally, this function can be run at startup for automated update
check, opt-in by default, of course. I believe that will match the
behavior of 'most' proprietary IDEs.
The idea of Emacs setup/startup screen shines with stuff like this,
where these options are selected by user at the very beginning. This can
even be included in current startup screen as simple hyperlink, IMO and
would be a worthy addition.
It can also optionally include updating all the activated *ELPAs.
Perhaps it can be called something like `emacs-check-update`?
--
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* bug#63536: Feature Request
2023-05-17 14:04 ` Payas Relekar
@ 2023-05-17 17:16 ` Eli Zaretskii
0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2023-05-17 17:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Payas Relekar; +Cc: 63536, andrewgoh95
> From: Payas Relekar <relekarpayas@gmail.com>
> Cc: Andrew Goh <andrewgoh95@yahoo.com.sg>, 63536@debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Wed, 17 May 2023 19:34:06 +0530
>
> The idea itself is valid, as long as the update check happens only at
> explicit user action. The command should only compare current version of
> Emacs with the latest update and inform user about the difference. Then
> the onus is on user to proceed with the update. Command output can point
> them to relevant section of the manual, informing of ways to install
> (and also update) Emacs.
How will we know where to look? That's the main technical issue with
this, I think.
Another possible issue is whether just to tell the user "A newer
version XY.Z is available, you can download it at <URL>", or also
offer a possibility of actually downloading the newer version?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* bug#63536: Feature Request
2023-05-16 11:39 ` bug#63536: Feature Request Andrew Goh via Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors
2023-05-16 15:46 ` Eli Zaretskii
2023-05-17 14:04 ` Payas Relekar
@ 2023-05-17 15:40 ` Payas Relekar
2023-05-17 15:51 ` Payas Relekar
3 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Payas Relekar @ 2023-05-17 15:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Eli Zaretskii; +Cc: 63536, andrewgoh95
Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
>> From: Payas Relekar <relekarpayas@gmail.com>
>> Cc: Andrew Goh <andrewgoh95@yahoo.com.sg>, 63536@debbugs.gnu.org
>> Date: Wed, 17 May 2023 19:34:06 +0530
>>
>> The idea itself is valid, as long as the update check happens only at
>> explicit user action. The command should only compare current version of
>> Emacs with the latest update and inform user about the difference. Then
>> the onus is on user to proceed with the update. Command output can point
>> them to relevant section of the manual, informing of ways to install
>> (and also update) Emacs.
>
> How will we know where to look? That's the main technical issue with
> this, I think.
>
> Another possible issue is whether just to tell the user "A newer
> version XY.Z is available, you can download it at <URL>", or also
> offer a possibility of actually downloading the newer version?
The former is preferred. Emacs users more often than not use third party
mechanisms (e.g. package managers) to get it installed. Any action for
actually downloading would muddy the waters. Here's the flow that I
imagine:
1. User runs `M-x emacs-check-update`
2. Emacs checks GNU repo and provides somthing like:
`Update for Emacs 29.1 is now available. Current version is 28.2.
If you installed Emacs via a package manager like your GNU/linux
distribution, homebrew, Guix etc, please follow their respective
instructions.
If you installed Emacs by compiling from source, follow _link to
latest Emacs compilation instructions_.
If you'd like to check for updates for Emacs-Lisp packages, please
check 'package-upgrade'`
3. User chooses to follow or ignore the instructions.
The wording would play big part, but as long as we make it clear to
follow the path of original installation is preferred, I think most
users can figure it out, just like the rest of the manual.
At any point, Emacs providing built-in mechanism for update, while nice
to have, will be gigantic pain to implement and even bigger pain to
maintain. Something like rustup is well-desired, but Emacs has very
broad scope and dependency tree unlike rust toolchain, so I'd rather
avoid it.
--
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* bug#63536: Feature Request
2023-05-16 11:39 ` bug#63536: Feature Request Andrew Goh via Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2023-05-17 15:40 ` Payas Relekar
@ 2023-05-17 15:51 ` Payas Relekar
3 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Payas Relekar @ 2023-05-17 15:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Eli Zaretskii; +Cc: 63536, andrewgoh95
Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
>> From: Payas Relekar <relekarpayas@gmail.com>
>> Cc: Andrew Goh <andrewgoh95@yahoo.com.sg>, 63536@debbugs.gnu.org
>> Date: Wed, 17 May 2023 19:34:06 +0530
>>
>> The idea itself is valid, as long as the update check happens only at
>> explicit user action. The command should only compare current version of
>> Emacs with the latest update and inform user about the difference. Then
>> the onus is on user to proceed with the update. Command output can point
>> them to relevant section of the manual, informing of ways to install
>> (and also update) Emacs.
>
> How will we know where to look? That's the main technical issue with
> this, I think.
>
Sorry, I missed this in previous mail. Where do we look? GNU Emacs
stable release URL, of course. As long as the latest version available
upstream (FTP or the git branch directly) is higher than user's version,
we are good to report.
If the users see their package manager does not have the latest version,
that's a good motivation for reporting it there. But the wording should
be clear for the same.
--
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread