From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dmitry Gutov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: ELPA commit freeze Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2013 00:14:10 +0300 Message-ID: <52167F22.3020501@yandex.ru> References: <871u5w1tpy.fsf@yandex.ru> <520FA630.8080003@yandex.ru> <5211BBC8.40408@yandex.ru> <52133662.1000900@yandex.ru> <5213FA1C.3080700@yandex.ru> <52147393.9070509@yandex.ru> <5215364A.9000605@yandex.ru> <52155933.4080509@yandex.ru> <5215D018.70308@yandex.ru> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1377206066 19953 80.91.229.3 (22 Aug 2013 21:14:26 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2013 21:14:26 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Aug 22 23:14:29 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1VCcD6-0002RA-TC for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 22 Aug 2013 23:14:29 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:33883 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VCcD6-0006Ye-46 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 22 Aug 2013 17:14:28 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:48241) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VCcCy-0006WC-7p for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 22 Aug 2013 17:14:25 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VCcCs-00024V-SS for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 22 Aug 2013 17:14:20 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-ee0-x233.google.com ([2a00:1450:4013:c00::233]:53450) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VCcCs-00024N-My for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 22 Aug 2013 17:14:14 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-ee0-f51.google.com with SMTP id c1so1177227eek.38 for ; Thu, 22 Aug 2013 14:14:13 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=yJLTFLGI69x6RrhIcoDJqpkhfKvpkdNKjR/z6r4o3RI=; b=PyD85AQWIQLSFrNhFsPDhmJW35rzLl4uNtciAq4STpCBiHJLVXcIrp9okaxy0Vahyd 1vj58p1kkB0u4syHi3g4HcOLJQlSdiIP9hbdxqyxm5L01JwYunAM7HRXYeUHiI5cr8FM fA+oXvYQp/cbAFLShuWnMricK7cdO/Qn6IpLmVJ1DKCZ9ZLQcDBr+ZvaszAUTm4Tk9x6 UeziUipa8qc/HQGZxgevd6hZEujJqWnJ54cUi+vR1JQixlQHTJ9AKemMVFKQy7tsqXZd fOrfPSu4bxGf5P1vNK6sraTqzrtZugz5xCT6azJnpDPuxi7MgDPBkwofQtujuwb3LNE+ Hb9A== X-Received: by 10.15.99.72 with SMTP id bk48mr21368606eeb.22.1377206053830; Thu, 22 Aug 2013 14:14:13 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from [192.168.10.2] (62-118-214.netrun.cytanet.com.cy. [62.228.118.214]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id f49sm20137671eec.7.1969.12.31.16.00.00 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 22 Aug 2013 14:14:12 -0700 (PDT) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130803 Thunderbird/17.0.8 In-Reply-To: X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2a00:1450:4013:c00::233 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:162985 Archived-At: On 22.08.2013 23:35, Stefan Monnier wrote: >>> Why couldn't that be fixed? Why should usage info not be in README.md? >> Because it's customary to put at least something into Commentary, usage info >> seems to be the most natural info to put there, and duplicating text is not >> nice. See my previous emails for better arguments. > > OK. let's try to take a step back. You're suggesting that we need > 2 places where we put different info (one being the Commentary: and > another being the README.*). That's what often happens already anyway. > I just don't see it. If you want to put info in the README, then you > can put all the relevant info in the README, and the Commentary: can > be trivial. And vice versa. Yes, nothing's stopping us from arranging the information in any arbitrary way. Except for social factors. To have the description recognized by both Elpa and Melpa, currently I'd have to keep the same text in README.md and Commentary. And `describe-package' buffer from Melpa would end up looking better due to not having extraneous info. To switch Melpa over to preferring text from README.md over Commentary, you'd have to make an argument that it would result in better, more relevant descriptions for packages that they distribute, overall. And they are tracking ~300 multi-file and ~2700 single-file packages, so it's not like we can easily change a significant portion of them over to a different convention. >>>> Take company's README.md, for example. It's barren, but Commentary in >>>> company.el contains what you'd expect from a description. I'd like to keep >>>> things that way there. > > Why? Why not move the info from company.el to README.md (where it can > be made prettier while you're at it)? It already has a homepage that has all that info. It's prettier than the github page due to having some dedicated styling. Putting the same stuff on the homepage and in README.md would, again, result in duplication, or at least some non-trivial work by automating the export from the latter into the former. It's doable, but the link works just as good.