From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Bozhidar Batsov" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Don't add tags to ELPA packages -- documentation? Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2021 11:15:37 +0300 Message-ID: <6ce33114-eb23-4820-bc9c-84a7377c4c85@www.fastmail.com> References: <87fsv7bww1.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <87k0kjoi3j.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <7dc63c685f15a500c7b37a153c28f6b3@webmail.orcon.net.nz> <87bl5vod7t.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <9f29e7dafac0498cffad17b4db809445@webmail.orcon.net.nz> <83e594e7-e7b1-455d-807c-2b3020abdf4a@www.fastmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=12dbb8a5eb2e40c395a39b345d938bfd Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="9873"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.5.0-alpha0-1118-g75eff666e5-fm-20210816.002-g75eff666 To: "Emacs Devel" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Aug 18 10:16:53 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 1mGGkm-0002EN-AG for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 18 Aug 2021 10:16:53 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:45244 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mGGkk-0003Wg-QF for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 18 Aug 2021 04:16:50 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:41306) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mGGk2-0002qn-Ex for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 18 Aug 2021 04:16:06 -0400 Original-Received: from wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com ([64.147.123.20]:55203) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mGGjx-0007OZ-Rc for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 18 Aug 2021 04:16:05 -0400 Original-Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9385432001BB for ; Wed, 18 Aug 2021 04:15:59 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from imap43 ([10.202.2.93]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 18 Aug 2021 04:15:59 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=batsov.dev; h= mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :subject:content-type; s=fm1; bh=9cWrFh3x0c52nGPlwfXrU8v8ZbBgmkH PAlPjQtogUGE=; b=GOBHsVK/pkjwaQEkx+P4Dy9vOQy/4Cd+F+d8czGjoiA0ggj tcjgsn1JTDLzvs5FGLK6wWQJiTDegfwk5FabsfULFrwoeEP4HI5z8bQH9zoy8wNW a66+YXF9ccc2//MSVAvulHuRpe2DQ+JggTMNQMkdxck3wxFEwiUvuFcGefxnFlbd lGIAKJ0DVYCJ4lZHXIsou948rktb9hEhO9f6m/12unKadQ13E4T/TDu6r515Y7Wg 8H+xurPJxrTxI/0OjpGCsUymhxPm10ZCBK/meuLTEAaYO5BmzMZsuDU4ZFs03zuV ycojFGlOYSfp3fvaXR6Q4TnTf9b3MmQCSePAGXQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=9cWrFh 3x0c52nGPlwfXrU8v8ZbBgmkHPAlPjQtogUGE=; b=Xc6Ie+8kuJbR9mKPob7IHW F0vd+OImahw3EUk7bwXiFpZyZk84WyzBRReGQtvbaKT57e1modSQ2kvIc0B7JpMk Ze9EGBI28ziwLQdMuD0y+aSElK19rbWK0oPd1OfUbwAuFsDFKiykcof/909Hoha2 5ucHzJb6GBUcmcJbJztmxJw7+Gv0ihnliik7mk7T0WVAmu86BBgwuBVKSBahdHmw 5gNRus36cwbhf/jD8+yb0ctzoz2C7hGWkh3r8CoyEzeWIXnukbPqElHu+6MrVuWU H69cbyNOdqN9aJsXDFIRUuSQzKYg8c0d1cd871LXDfUd6Vd9ItLqCSxc7wntMM3g == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvtddrleehgddtvdcutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpefofgggkfgjfhffhffvufgtsegrtderreerredtnecuhfhrohhmpedfuehoiihh ihgurghruceurghtshhovhdfuceosghoiihhihgurghrsegsrghtshhovhdruggvvheqne cuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhepgedvteefkeekteeilefftdekuddthffffeegtdevhfetfeev jefhgfdtkeejieeunecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilh hfrhhomhepsghoiihhihgurghrsegsrghtshhovhdruggvvh X-ME-Proxy: Original-Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 8C1DBAC0DD1; Wed, 18 Aug 2021 04:15:58 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface In-Reply-To: Received-SPF: pass client-ip=64.147.123.20; envelope-from=bozhidar@batsov.dev; helo=wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com X-Spam_score_int: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:272551 Archived-At: --12dbb8a5eb2e40c395a39b345d938bfd Content-Type: text/plain Makes perfect sense. Thanks for the response! I've only used (NonGNU) ELPA with remote upstreams, that's why I wasn't sure for whom exactly does this conversation apply. On Wed, Aug 18, 2021, at 10:21 AM, Phil Sainty wrote: > On 2021-08-18 18:41, Bozhidar Batsov wrote: > > I'm a bit confused by the conversation so far. Can someone elaborate > > on "maintainers have explicitly pushed their tags to the ELPA repo"? > > I do tag all the releases of my packages, as that's a common (and > > good) practice, but I don't understand why would something like this > > be affecting ELPA negatively. > > It won't. Not unless you went out of your way to make it a problem. > > Your "single project repository" is not the ELPA repo. The ELPA repo > contains all of the packages in that archive. > > This whole discussion only applies if you are manually pushing code > changes to the ELPA repo. If your package is defined as an external > repo for ELPA's build processes to fetch automatically, then you aren't > pushing *anything* to the ELPA repo at all. > > > > Does it sync the tags from the remotes or what? > > No, it doesn't, so tags can't be a problem if ELPA is fetching the > updates itself. > > > > In general I don't think that something like "stop tagging your > > releases upstream" is a good solution. > > Keep tagging to your heart's content in your own repository. Just > don't push those tags to the ELPA repo (which you would need to do > explicitly with options to the "git push" command). > > > > Adding a prefix to the tag name (e.g. the package name) also seems > > weird in the context of a single project repository. > > Again, this was purely in the context of the multi-project ELPA repo. > If someone particularly wanted tags in the ELPA repo for a package, > then the tags would need to be namespaced with a prefix in order to > avoid potential clashes. > > > -Phil > > > --12dbb8a5eb2e40c395a39b345d938bfd Content-Type: text/html Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Makes perfect s= ense. Thanks for the response! 

I've o= nly used (NonGNU) ELPA with remote upstreams, that's why I wasn't sure f= or whom
exactly does this conversation apply. 
<= div>
On Wed, Aug 18, 2021, at 10:21 AM, Phil Sainty wrote:=
On 2021-08= -18 18:41, Bozhidar Batsov wrote:
> I'm a bit confused = by the conversation so far. Can someone elaborate
> on = "maintainers have explicitly pushed their tags to the ELPA repo"?
> I do tag all the releases of my packages, as that's a commo= n (and
> good) practice, but I don't understand why wou= ld something like this
> be affecting ELPA negatively.<= br>

It won't.  Not unless you went out of = your way to make it a problem.

Your "single= project repository" is not the ELPA repo.  The ELPA repo
=
contains all of the packages in that archive.

This whole discussion only applies if you are manually pushing c= ode
changes to the ELPA repo.  If your package is def= ined as an external
repo for ELPA's build processes to fet= ch automatically, then you aren't
pushing *anything* to th= e ELPA repo at all.


> Doe= s it sync the tags from the remotes or what?

No, it doesn't, so tags can't be a problem if ELPA is fetching the
=
updates itself.


&= gt; In general I don't think that something like "stop tagging your
<= /div>
> releases upstream" is a good solution.

=
Keep tagging to your heart's content in your own repository.&= nbsp; Just
don't push those tags to the ELPA repo (which y= ou would need to do
explicitly with options to the "git pu= sh" command).


> Adding a = prefix to the tag name (e.g. the package name) also seems
= > weird in the context of a single project repository.
=
Again, this was purely in the context of the multi-projec= t ELPA repo.
If someone particularly wanted tags in the EL= PA repo for a package,
then the tags would need to be name= spaced with a prefix in order to
avoid potential clashes.<= br>


-Phil




--12dbb8a5eb2e40c395a39b345d938bfd--