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: Wed, 12 Apr 2023 09:51:08 +0100 Message-ID: References: <87a5zj2vfo.fsf@gmail.com> <87wn2modrm.fsf@posteo.net> <87ile6o2ov.fsf@posteo.net> <87y1mz38rl.fsf@posteo.net> <87ile2n0kn.fsf@gmail.com> <83v8i2abqi.fsf@gnu.org> <87wn2ilgx7.fsf@gmail.com> <83a5ze9uc1.fsf@gnu.org> <831qkq9rpy.fsf@gnu.org> <83pm898xb9.fsf@gnu.org> <87h6tlleg0.fsf@gmail.com> <8335558qc7.fsf@gnu.org> 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="27050"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: larsi@gnus.org, 62720@debbugs.gnu.org, philipk@posteo.net, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Apr 12 10:52:22 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 1pmWDF-0006kD-T5 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 12 Apr 2023 10:52:22 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pmWCy-0001B1-ST; Wed, 12 Apr 2023 04:52:04 -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 1pmWCx-0001As-JK for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Apr 2023 04:52:03 -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 1pmWCx-0007uE-8b for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Apr 2023 04:52:03 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1pmWCw-0006jL-CG for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Apr 2023 04:52:02 -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: Wed, 12 Apr 2023 08:52:02 +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=B62720.168128948825823 (code B ref 62720); Wed, 12 Apr 2023 08:52:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 62720) by debbugs.gnu.org; 12 Apr 2023 08:51:28 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39013 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1pmWCN-0006iQ-L0 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 12 Apr 2023 04:51:28 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-oa1-f46.google.com ([209.85.160.46]:37852) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1pmWCM-0006i1-3R for 62720@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 12 Apr 2023 04:51:26 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-oa1-f46.google.com with SMTP id 586e51a60fabf-1842eb46746so12930516fac.4 for <62720@debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 12 Apr 2023 01:51:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20221208; t=1681289480; x=1683881480; 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=i9aa/vqUkWX0MAz4gtanzK5+Eo3ZNdUuuBLChjtprBg=; b=QyNuwMZvh2qpvY2eb/+RFf8ecKPW8wrjHcOqwAmWKkHWmuzBQurxDu4h5OuMK7Nd19 /71gMCN8nyRjg/hBq4KD+PZEbZ267kVLx2kir9PwJ5yKkPIvUHJo7c9IuPSu6Bh1iz4j iFZ0ZpIH0jgMDmONa0yPeYW2OoPoKta5dIghW/lcrDhEtMVmflvgA/M0ItGnsMBHTden 7fd/yK4+/V4SE8mEaehBKRBtwRTEtO3vX7MoOM5N/IBjm8NtC7y0uDPPPPdldSwmI03d 9P/y0wLyPXRUJWza0PVIbK9PU5Qq5462g8+eAvQNloiX/CwClASchthBQcrKc/bEPfVF MxzA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; t=1681289480; x=1683881480; 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=i9aa/vqUkWX0MAz4gtanzK5+Eo3ZNdUuuBLChjtprBg=; b=oVEgArWOALdz8aVVGnpKP4sP6vItR22ZXwDBpn56b6nhtKkgwrJCpvZmGhNRmrBwQA PNjRGyyGafWWI2fHna5HK/9dWoIyAdj+fQboELCwlQhwQR37M1NDorHl9u4hNVN+8uj3 Jzhd3dvXAIaMn6ggf1z2b8yzJpgZwViBjcUwN2t3KHWbyHU399LVmrTM4d9AQ6oFOvDD zii4jdUnfzj7KmbdS/9y80qMO9hLptYGmnP6o8hqARpQAQMl0ssjaT8SDkpPHJ3hNRr4 SqwUpTGmw47PTZDtfv0AwwdvL3RBN1rONypE1Zs7e7SDxLOnklS7fPRp4GE9M+dXoJul imGA== X-Gm-Message-State: AAQBX9fEkHD1Hb5IRAxwW6mXju4ikSuPLlenbnEvRgcsuoPwL59CvrK8 FoK9ac/O48+2HJenVYOPeAjHOjym6KRyv85GZW0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AKy350Z6g1OyJfGykW0z663wX+aT85DEgKLYrNtf9iueM4NIeE9h/AW5Ppe5Jr79cKdjpBAHGIuQiugw9fkpqLltPno= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6871:282:b0:187:7874:8afa with SMTP id i2-20020a056871028200b0018778748afamr341501oae.5.1681289480020; Wed, 12 Apr 2023 01:51:20 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <8335558qc7.fsf@gnu.org> 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:259712 Archived-At: On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 9:19=E2=80=AFAM Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > Your solution doesn't "give me what I want". If I add 'eglot-update' i= t > > will work as a single command on every Emacs version from Emacs 26.3 > > onwards. This new command you're proposing is for Emacs 29 only (and > > will presumably be deprecated soon). > > Since you started by proposing a patch to package.el, that solution > had the same issues with older Emacsen. In onler Emacsen, M-x package-install works. I was going to also propose that M-x package-install on Emacs 29 offers to upgrade. But if even a "fixed" (IMO, of course) M-x package-update isn't accepted, then I won't even bother proposing fixing M-x package-install on Emacs 29. > IOW, that is a separate > problem. In particular, Eglot is not bundled in those older Emacsen, > so package.el should support updating Eglot just fine for those older > versions. Yes, but the command that two users using, say, Emacs 28 and Emacs 29 will be different. And happen to think that's unfortunate. > > So this is "what I want": smooth user experience with no new commands o= r > > at least simple ones that don't require understanding emacs dev > > concepts. > > If we want the solution be general, rather than having a separate > update command for each core package, then there's a limit to what we > can do to give this smooth user experience to users of older Emacsen. > However, I don't think in this case there's a problem, see above. I don't think this "limit" really exists. As far as I understand, if I had detected this problem earlier or your perception of the stability of my patch for emacs-29 were different, then this problem would be well on its way to non-existence. > > I think 'package-update-core-package' is just unfortunate, because the > > regular user doesn't care what the heck is core, and can you blame her? > > I disagree with your assessment. Moreover, I think such a command is > needed anyway, for reasons other than the ones which prompted this bug > report. > > > I can't stop you from adding it, of course. Have you thought how it > > should behave when the package is no longer a core package, i.e. has > > already updated? > > Yes, see my other messages. I can't well understand what the behaviour will be, I'll wait to see the final version. > > I have to ask (though I can guess the answer): may I add 'eglot-update' > > anyway to emacs-29 as a no-brainer shortcut in the meantime? > > I'd prefer not to have package-specific upgrade commands. I hope we > will soon add to package.el on emacs-29 a new command that will allow > users to update core packages, including Eglot, and that will solve > the problem for users of Emacs 29 and later, where Eglot is bundled. FTR I would also 100% also "prefer not to have package-specific upgrade commands" :-) That would be my preference too. But again, I really have to ask :-), may I add it or would you revert the commit immediately? Again, I'm just looking to have a congruent, simple way to tell users how to ensure latest Eglot version without needing to know if they have Emacs 29, 27 or 47. This command, while also not being my first "preferenc= e", fulfills that requirement. Can we have it? It's only 4 lines of code. Jo=C3=A3o