On Tue, Apr 11, 2023, 19:51 Eli Zaretskii <
eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
> From: João Távora <joaotavora@gmail.com>
> Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2023 19:31:09 +0100
> Cc: philipk@posteo.net, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, 62720@debbugs.gnu.org,
> larsi@gnus.org
>
> > See above. Given the problems I mentioned, I'm allowed to doubt that
> > you yourself understand the changes well enough to vouch for them.
> > And even if you did vouch, my gray hair won't believe you. So I
> > prefer to go for much safer, if slightly less clean, changes. I hope
> > one of the two alternatives I suggested will be acceptable.
>
> If this change can't go into emacs-29, I think it's better to add
> an M-x eglot-update to eglot.el.
That's the worst of all worlds.
Why? It's the safest option. Absolutely no package.el regression possible, and doesn't solve a problem where you don't think I've exists.
What is the problem with the two possible solutions I suggested?
They are incongruent and not very user friendly IMO.
João