Re: Finding packages to enable by default

[Stephen Leake <stephen_leake@stephe-leake.org>]

Stefan Monnier <monnier@IRO.UMontreal.CA> writes:

>> My plan is to put Ada mode 5.0 in MELPA first, in the hopes of getting
>> more beta testers.  Then it might move to ELPA.
>
> Installing it into Emacs's core just before the freeze will give you
> even more testers.

Yes, but also less ability to provide timely updates to fix problems.
That's an advantage of ELPA that I didn't mention before.

>> I don't think it should stay in Emacs core, mainly because I don't have
>> write privs to Emacs core,
>
> As Glenn pointed out, you do.
>
> If you want to move it to GNU ELPA, we could do that, but then I'd want
> to include this ELPA package into the Emacs tarball.  

That makes sense.

> This said, it'd be
> kind of a pain in the rear to do (lots of work to make sure the shift
> from "core" to "external package" is sufficiently smooth).

I have not tried packages in Emacs yet, so I can't really comment on
that. 

A much bigger lack of smoothness will caused by the fact that this is a
complete rewrite. I have been attempting to keep things as upwardly
compatible as possible. But it is not even close to 100%; the major
functionality in the menu is the same, and the main user options are
there, although renamed with obsoleted aliases. Some of the user
functions are the same, but others have changed. 

No one so far has complained about that, but I've only got a handful of
testers so far.

So I think it makes sense to leave Ada mode 4.0 in core while
introducing 5.0 in ELPA. Does that mean the file names and major mode
name have to be distinct? I hope not.

Since ELPA packages can be updated independent of core or other
packgages, managing a major change like this is easier in ELPA than in
core.

After 5.x is stable would be time to obsolete or delete Ada mode 5.0.

--
-- Stephe