From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#62750: 29.0.50; Commands 'package-update' and 'package-update-all' should be called '*-upgrade' Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2023 17:40:05 -0400 Message-ID: References: <2726a957-a2a8-3b89-8930-2d620d83491e@alphapapa.net> <83sfd7c1v1.fsf@gnu.org> <875ya3euof.fsf@posteo.net> Reply-To: Stefan Monnier Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="25720"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Cc: Adam Porter , Lars Ingebrigtsen , Philip Kaludercic , Eli Zaretskii , 62750@debbugs.gnu.org To: Dmitry Gutov Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Apr 11 23:41:14 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 1pmLjm-0006WV-3x for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 11 Apr 2023 23:41:14 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pmLjc-00071z-8X; Tue, 11 Apr 2023 17:41:04 -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 1pmLja-00071p-Qe for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Apr 2023 17:41:02 -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 1pmLja-0001Bo-Fk for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Apr 2023 17:41:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1pmLja-0002Nt-7V for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Apr 2023 17:41:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Stefan Monnier Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2023 21:41:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 62750 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 62750-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B62750.16812492169102 (code B ref 62750); Tue, 11 Apr 2023 21:41:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 62750) by debbugs.gnu.org; 11 Apr 2023 21:40:16 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38426 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1pmLip-0002Mk-UL for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 11 Apr 2023 17:40:16 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:52967) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1pmLim-0002MW-HC for 62750@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 11 Apr 2023 17:40:14 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 3B0AB10012D; Tue, 11 Apr 2023 17:40:07 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id E47F110011A; Tue, 11 Apr 2023 17:40:05 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1681249205; bh=WwJC9M/rG5AJov2neBtRz6oKk2lFnU9vE8y+USxn4cA=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=fD3lBKEmrivNTEPqaoYJQO6JRKRu5CPMYZ6BAn0hLf0VPyUjIoP6d4sFTJDJ4/INX vG79g3FCqcruWnRt89ZNdkMzHBL6gcAUG5Hy5qfHekv1SfIe6zRuqOKNLLvtBsj6/r WyqXHQ52MZ9oozYpj5+87zLtd/MV0yu8+7Qk4ecA9aE5QYl1Fch8eldb2wD6iqnRU1 LGyhdUl56+Ym2xBYWm4nyAAjwKjbdhkt8Sjan/HWY7+vDxjteIvIqRfT3RBEztp62Q 7RIJUH+k2ImqsPcSGB6z9Ew0ugSHvaPCqCd/KmcviPAZGJ/42WTw7a96aDhJy+eVtG Q2VP3oN1hky4g== Original-Received: from lechazo (lechon.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.27.242]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D26DA120263; Tue, 11 Apr 2023 17:40:05 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Dmitry Gutov's message of "Wed, 12 Apr 2023 00:28:14 +0300") 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:259683 Archived-At: >>> I don't think that "update" and "upgrade" have that clear of a semantic >>> difference in practice to necessitate a renaming. >> I'd tend to agree. > > Here's an argument in favor of renaming: > > These commands use the term 'update'. But package-menu-mark-upgrades, which > has been in package.el for years, uses the term 'upgrade' in its name and > its docstring ("all upgradable packages", etc). There are a few auxiliary > functions which also use that term, but this is the public-facing one. > > So now we have divergent terminology. Which implies that there is some > difference between "upgrading" and "updating" in package.el, while there > is none. Good point. It's annoyingly late to rename, but if we rename without compatibility aliases (which seems to be an option since these are new in Emacs-29), then I'd be in favor. Stefan