From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Stability of core packages (was: Not easy at all to upgrade :core packages like Eglot) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2023 21:32:12 +0300 Message-ID: <83o7nj7mfn.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87a5zj2vfo.fsf@gmail.com> <83sfd2g2ek.fsf@gnu.org> <875y9yfxrr.fsf@gmail.com> <87y1muefks.fsf@gmail.com> <834jpifizy.fsf@gnu.org> <83y1mue1qi.fsf@gnu.org> <83sfd2e01f.fsf@gnu.org> <1a5e5837-513b-84d8-3260-cdbf42b71267@gutov.dev> <83sfcz9rf2.fsf@gnu.org> <09a49ab9-ac72-36a9-3e68-9c633710eba7@gutov.dev> <83r0sh8i1q.fsf@gnu.org> <35638c9d-e13f-fad8-5f95-ea03d65d4aa2@gmail.com> <87a5z3izst.fsf@web.de> <83v8hr7qk9.fsf@gnu.org> <83pm7z7nkc.fsf@gnu.org> <4b63ef62-5e1c-3dcf-ec7b-06b69e79133b@gutov.dev> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="22106"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: joaotavora@gmail.com, arne_bab@web.de, jporterbugs@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Dmitry Gutov Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Apr 19 20:32:53 2023 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 1ppCbt-0005YH-95 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 19 Apr 2023 20:32:53 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ppCb8-0003jU-Uu; Wed, 19 Apr 2023 14:32:07 -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 1ppCb5-0003hi-Q7 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Apr 2023 14:32:05 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ppCb4-000836-0X; Wed, 19 Apr 2023 14:32:03 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-version:References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From: Date; bh=tOxydlBJIgyARDlgsLuwky1yfxzafFZaBt8m4wmAHhs=; b=EU//sQOqIeEEvrt+1rpy A0q792u/elj+A73R50W7mN1An/WFjEUq/4YTgWhX7JeF8S6zE1acDvUYjgAvARKX6zXPX8LlvERk0 JY9Og6VlpUuvk9M8ZMPq1EKwlLAAdz3i9xPXeGNzHw7NEcdU7jWMoCc2z4fCvaXRAwztWDO26yBR8 ZJvXE/WPW+0FmZ18UO4sC2RapKyj9j1Zk4/YU3jN2v8WEKUHsz0J+ouJ+aFXz0EhFg8X5UaH+CYR9 9WJg8L/4KgyPL/j5wCygzTI2bv0IGOWQn+i2SAHLXe2tkBgYMiQdJzTzwZo9EzoeHhr59RO2Rx4R8 CTRPEO1WCpq7ZQ==; Original-Received: from [87.69.77.57] (helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ppCb2-0001PV-TA; Wed, 19 Apr 2023 14:32:01 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4b63ef62-5e1c-3dcf-ec7b-06b69e79133b@gutov.dev> (message from Dmitry Gutov on Wed, 19 Apr 2023 21:14:06 +0300) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:305453 Archived-At: > Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2023 21:14:06 +0300 > Cc: arne_bab@web.de, jporterbugs@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org > From: Dmitry Gutov > > On 19/04/2023 21:07, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > It has similar problems: it will automatically update packages > > mentioned in package--safely-upgradeable-builtins, which might not be > > what users want for built-in packages. > > IMO that kind of choice could be deferred to the maintainer of each > individual package. No, it cannot, and this and the sibling discussions show why: the package maintainers are biased in favor of their packages. That (completely understandable and expected) bias prevents them from seeing the overall picture objectively. > Or make it a defcustom if you're really worried. That doesn't change the picture, unless the default for the defcustom will be nil. Which I expect João to object to, because he wants Eglot to be updated by default and automatically. Whereas I think the compromise, whereby the user should say just once that he/she wants Eglot to be automatically updated, is a good compromise given the constraints in this case. Not ideal, but a good-enough compromise. > BTW, even choosing that patch where this user option is a defcustom > defaulting to nil would make more sense to me than the patch we > currently decided to install. See above. > > You assume that everyone will > > want Eglot and use-package automatically updated, but this assumption > > has no real basis. > > People don't call 'M-x package-install' automatically, nor do they put > those calls in their init files automatically. That's factually incorrect, AFAIU. Moreover, the cases that bothered João (again, AFAIU) were exactly those which you say don't exist.