From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?UTF-8?Q?Jo=C3=A3o_?= =?UTF-8?Q?T=C3=A1vora?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#62720: 29.0.60; Not easy at all to upgrade :core packages like Eglot Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2023 17:40:44 +0100 Message-ID: References: <87a5zj2vfo.fsf@gmail.com> <83wn2h5825.fsf@gnu.org> <87wn2gkhzr.fsf@posteo.net> <83cz485oxi.fsf@gnu.org> <87leiwdyff.fsf@posteo.net> <834jpk5hih.fsf@gnu.org> <871qkom3fj.fsf@posteo.net> <83mt3b4yfc.fsf@gnu.org> <87edonlsxi.fsf@posteo.net> <83jzyf4vzb.fsf@gnu.org> <871qknllkj.fsf@posteo.net> <83fs934pjf.fsf@gnu.org> <87wn2fk47y.fsf@posteo.net> <83sfd2g2ek.fsf@gnu.org> <875y9yfxrr.fsf@gmail.com> <87y1muefks.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="15036"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Philip Kaludercic , larsi@gnus.org, Robert Pluim , Eli Zaretskii , 62720@debbugs.gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Apr 14 18:42:26 2023 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1pnMVF-0003fq-Dt for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 14 Apr 2023 18:42:25 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pnMUz-00069V-Nx; Fri, 14 Apr 2023 12:42:09 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pnMUw-00068k-Qt for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 14 Apr 2023 12:42:07 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pnMUr-0001XK-Uz for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 14 Apr 2023 12:42:06 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1pnMUr-0003FB-Qu for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 14 Apr 2023 12:42:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: =?UTF-8?Q?Jo=C3=A3o_?= =?UTF-8?Q?T=C3=A1vora?= Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2023 16:42:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 62720 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 62720-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B62720.168149046312396 (code B ref 62720); Fri, 14 Apr 2023 16:42:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 62720) by debbugs.gnu.org; 14 Apr 2023 16:41:03 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47445 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1pnMTv-0003Ds-1m for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 14 Apr 2023 12:41:03 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-oa1-f41.google.com ([209.85.160.41]:45710) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1pnMTt-0003DH-7o for 62720@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 14 Apr 2023 12:41:01 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-oa1-f41.google.com with SMTP id 586e51a60fabf-18779252f7fso10326865fac.12 for <62720@debbugs.gnu.org>; Fri, 14 Apr 2023 09:41:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20221208; t=1681490455; x=1684082455; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=YjSWaI3qxmOkiMi52WJ8AglA6RmmDlTRjA+tOww+L3E=; b=FuvNl30K9mZH0dJzTySfA7MKQSKya9yEiGEgj0U6d8L/JsEE03nEvck/JDHJC5IsF2 0+P9UvGPhuPGhgyN8uQm7jWUpPdTiWsW3X9MdU6CDdiUdiallMqNV2Q4My+5MUstwitH dKttNpMVtK6Km5t/yTSYQiV4sd2idi2DZaWgENrGTzwnbqiZ+YDqm5SQW64FoLtxnomB oVEkiRutyrgb17+oUP/+fij+ScaHG7HoHK/n9Wb+HuZw83uQMFXFoo4pHYEdPuxKGhk3 r3dAKZQ4OcyXPqGmBCYYRlmoRQHZkHw4QRUlD+vAU6TdNVpDUCQ86i9Cjydqn0xwJ1Sv f/dg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1681490455; x=1684082455; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=YjSWaI3qxmOkiMi52WJ8AglA6RmmDlTRjA+tOww+L3E=; b=HqJyVNIoUY/yPhdHfxOenfbQDxIfpONhFkVDNc1Rht5a9ijo+gWCHWT0SorTRdVQze pR3cfjGxnDEvTsjK6QcY5OYsfe/ywcbIUHVKWeWizGfV8Mb/n0vftFVv8sjvf23AjUWx LbACY4vaEZaFaz1+01VE2M6s/gmxukzT6ejC3Wo6Y3RBKq2so7tgy8SCzWDxLqrjRY2U +ok2/N1+lt2ZadwAF2ZSYqy/uAon3UQSAR+jEyFfj0JBvf3mZQvWI+1J3XLQlJltfNmI TDF6HosPeDapn8/ugN0Ee0xxYLFLYOub/iQh8WuESd/oKngImTyPKL6ZTySEDb0u7zrM UJzA== X-Gm-Message-State: AAQBX9eYHrgwEQaTlIUKuTJXOjZ5CZa6w0wVvQ5MMgwE8PcGl+waUDGH /7CwSAKskC82oSuCaODP9lcp1tZqZ6z50vmFXQg= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AKy350ZggN9wNgkZHRrhI+ozR7bdigosRB9v6wV2/alcnjAxvNDe2SpTNzyL2CwSXWTqAkyIwtpc0yS8cIhdxOW02/E= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6870:5627:b0:187:7af4:4d08 with SMTP id m39-20020a056870562700b001877af44d08mr3127906oao.5.1681490455297; Fri, 14 Apr 2023 09:40:55 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:259941 Archived-At: On Fri, Apr 14, 2023 at 5:28=E2=80=AFPM Stefan Monnier wrote: > The only way I can think of to preserve compatibility is to change the > behavior so it doesn't pay attention to "is builtin or not" but to "used > to be builtin before Emacs-29". Exactly, I suggested this via whiteslisting. This would be blacklisting and would be slightly cleaner. > This would make a bad semantics even worse, so I'd rather we fix > the semantics to something clean. Bad semantics or not, at least it wouldn't break stuff, and that blacklist would stay put. Installing from it would require papal benediction and that's it :-) > > I think it should do the same thing, not only because it's > > nicer for the unsuspecting user, but also because trying to > > protect this user from "unintentional" upgrade of certain "unstable" > > packages, as it seems to be the idea here, is a losing game > > anyway, just because dependencies. > > You may be right: maybe the distinction between "install only" and > "install&upgrade" isn't worth the trouble. > > I think to get closer to a useful "install only" behavior we'd want that > command to prompt the user before upgrading dependencies (tho probably > only for those in `package-selected-packages`). > > BTW, for me the reluctance to upgrade when asked to install isn't due to > the risk that the package is "unstable". I'm not completely sure what > is the reason, admittedly, but it's closer to viewing it as a silent > "change of distribution", or maybe it's because I like to know when > behavior may change and merely installing a package shouldn't change > Emacs's behavior. I don't follow, they don't. Eexcept for major modes, that is, those autoloa= d changes into auto-mode-alist. As for adding new commands, and functionality to your existing modes, well you _did_ ask for the package to be upgraded (yes I know the name is "install", but upgrading is what it has always done). Jo=C3=A3o