From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Wolfgang Jenkner Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: ELPA policy Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2015 01:53:41 +0100 Message-ID: <854mgwf0sg.fsf@iznogoud.viz> References: <563ABD66.6070700@yandex.ru> <563AC64E.9060105@yandex.ru> <87twp0d2xp.fsf@md5i.com> <563B5E82.8070003@yandex.ru> <83mvuoo1pl.fsf@gnu.org> <85611c2wyh.fsf@iznogoud.viz> <83io5cnyid.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1447030622 10772 80.91.229.3 (9 Nov 2015 00:57:02 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2015 00:57:02 +0000 (UTC) Cc: mwd@md5i.com, jwiegley@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, rms@gnu.org, dgutov@yandex.ru To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Nov 09 01:56:49 2015 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 1ZvalM-0006Qu-Gd for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 09 Nov 2015 01:56:48 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:49324 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZvalG-0007pb-W9 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 08 Nov 2015 19:56:43 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49406) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZvalD-0007pW-R1 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 08 Nov 2015 19:56:40 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZvalA-0004bC-GS for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 08 Nov 2015 19:56:39 -0500 Original-Received: from b2bfep12.mx.upcmail.net ([62.179.121.57]:44198) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZvalA-0004aS-3r for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 08 Nov 2015 19:56:36 -0500 Original-Received: from edge11.upcmail.net ([192.168.13.81]) by b2bfep12.mx.upcmail.net (InterMail vM.8.01.05.18 201-2260-151-151-20140610) with ESMTP id <20151109005633.CATQ32668.b2bfep12-int.chello.at@edge11.upcmail.net> for ; Mon, 9 Nov 2015 01:56:33 +0100 Original-Received: from iznogoud.viz ([91.119.133.190]) by edge11.upcmail.net with edge id fCwY1r00m46eDrP0BCwZUd; Mon, 09 Nov 2015 01:56:33 +0100 X-SourceIP: 91.119.133.190 Original-Received: from wolfgang by iznogoud.viz with local (Exim 4.86 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1Zval6-0000LQ-GB; Mon, 09 Nov 2015 01:56:32 +0100 Mail-Followup-To: Eli Zaretskii , mwd@md5i.com, jwiegley@gmail.com, dgutov@yandex.ru, rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org User-Agent: Gnus/5.130014 (Ma Gnus v0.14) Emacs/25.0.50 (berkeley-unix) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 62.179.121.57 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:193667 Archived-At: On Sun, Nov 08 2015, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> On the other hand, IIUC, moving CEDET to emacs core has not been >> completely without problems for the CEDET project and its users. > > Such moves are never without problems, which is exactly my point. I was using the wrong word here as it's more a fork than a move: http://sourceforge.net/p/cedet/git/ci/master/tree/INSTALL > In > this case, I think the benefits far outweighed the problems: until > CEDET was incorporated into Emacs core, we couldn't even dream about > using it as infrastructure for IDEs and other similar features. CEDET being a separate project did not stop various people elsewhere from realizing their dream about an "IDE" according to their own ideas: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=emacs+cedet (sorry for giving a link to a google service...) > AFAIR, there was also lots of cleanup during the move. > But moving ELPA packages into the core is not being discussed or > suggested. So what happened with CEDET, even if you disagree with my > assessment above, has little relevance to the issue at hand. To be clear: FWIW, I agree that CEDET is great and that using real grammars for doing various stuff in emacs is an exciting idea. I