Perhaps an alternative macro `setopt-relaxed"? Documentation should suggest contacting package authors to request improvements (it's a very slow process to get misspecified packages updated and not all authors mean what they say when they themselves don't use the customize system--this group must know this all too well).

On Mon, Sep 9, 2024 at 11:28 AM Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:

> From: Michael Heerdegen <michael_heerdegen@web.de>
> Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>, 73098@debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Mon, 09 Sep 2024 17:11:40 +0200
>
> Ship Mints <shipmints@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > I'm suggesting that there will be noise from people who convert from a
> > working (setq some-package-option 2) to (setopt some-package-option
> > 2). This is not a request to change the elisp type system, it is a
> > request to consider if setopt's / customize internals should be
> > relaxed to the equivalent of #'= for these simple cases.
>
> How about adding an option letting the user disable the type checking of
> some options?

Like what? Would we accept, for example, a string where the type is
'symbol'? Or any value where type is 'boolean'?

And I'm also not sure we want this: presumably, if the defcustom's
author specified a type, they meant it, no?

Which is why I asked for opinions (but for now got only yours).

Stefan, WDYT?