From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Friendly discussion about (package-initialize) Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2017 07:25:22 +0300 Message-ID: <83inhwrqvh.fsf@gnu.org> References: Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1502339181 32102 195.159.176.226 (10 Aug 2017 04:26:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2017 04:26:21 +0000 (UTC) Cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Radon Rosborough Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Aug 10 06:26:14 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dff2v-0007hn-L9 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 10 Aug 2017 06:26:09 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:51089 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dff31-0001US-QB for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 10 Aug 2017 00:26:15 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:42843) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dff2T-0001UL-J1 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Aug 2017 00:25:42 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dff2O-0002zB-Hn for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Aug 2017 00:25:41 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:34995) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dff2O-0002z0-6I; Thu, 10 Aug 2017 00:25:36 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:2709 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1dff2N-0001Jg-H2; Thu, 10 Aug 2017 00:25:36 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from Radon Rosborough on Wed, 9 Aug 2017 20:32:59 -0700) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:217389 Archived-At: > From: Radon Rosborough > Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2017 20:32:59 -0700 > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > > > [ This file should be basically empty (tho could contain lots of > > comments. ] > > That can be debated later. At the minimum, though, it would have to > contain a (package-initialize), with lots of accompanying comments to > explain what it's doing there and where you should put your code to > configure packages. Can someone explain, preferably in concise form, why are we having this discussion about in which file to have the call to package-initialize, given that startup.el already calls that function (as IMO it should)? As you might guess, I don't use package.el, but this issue, which to my opinion seems to be already solved The Right Way, continues to generate such prolonged discussions that I wonder where did we make the wrong turn with package.el. Thanks.