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: New ELPA policy proposal Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2015 16:41:07 +0100 Message-ID: <85ziyn9nuv.fsf@iznogoud.viz> References: <87ziyuaqhl.fsf@petton.fr> <87fv0labbf.fsf@web.de> <87y4eda0kl.fsf@petton.fr> <22074.42230.156669.584780@retriever.mtv.corp.google.com> <87ziyoxvdp.fsf@Rainer.invalid> <83k2psnzyh.fsf@gnu.org> <87mvuorz7n.fsf@gmail.com> <8337wfon3f.fsf@gnu.org> <56401834.8080402@yandex.ru> <87611bh19q.fsf_-_@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1447084057 19309 80.91.229.3 (9 Nov 2015 15:47:37 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2015 15:47:37 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Oleh Krehel , emacs-devel To: Artur Malabarba Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Nov 09 16:47:27 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 1ZvofF-0003X5-4i for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 09 Nov 2015 16:47:25 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:53534 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZvofE-00022x-D9 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 09 Nov 2015 10:47:24 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:58520) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zvof0-00022o-Pg for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Nov 2015 10:47:11 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zvoex-00020d-Cq for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Nov 2015 10:47:10 -0500 Original-Received: from b2bfep13.mx.upcmail.net ([62.179.121.58]:60714) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zvoex-00020T-30 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Nov 2015 10:47:07 -0500 Original-Received: from edge11.upcmail.net ([192.168.13.81]) by b2bfep13.mx.upcmail.net (InterMail vM.8.01.05.18 201-2260-151-151-20140610) with ESMTP id <20151109154705.IYUR10641.b2bfep13-int.chello.at@edge11.upcmail.net> for ; Mon, 9 Nov 2015 16:47:05 +0100 Original-Received: from iznogoud.viz ([85.127.93.80]) by edge11.upcmail.net with edge id fTn41r03F1k295R0BTn5MK; Mon, 09 Nov 2015 16:47:05 +0100 X-SourceIP: 85.127.93.80 Original-Received: from wolfgang by iznogoud.viz with local (Exim 4.86 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1Zvoeu-0000JC-N6; Mon, 09 Nov 2015 16:47:04 +0100 Mail-Followup-To: Artur Malabarba , Oleh Krehel , emacs-devel 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: 62.179.121.58 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:193714 Archived-At: On Mon, Nov 09 2015, Artur Malabarba wrote: > * The first and simplest issue here is that we would lose control over > the code on Gelpa. But when is control over elisp code not bundled in the emacs tarball actually needed? I'd say, only in two cases: (1) code that is poised to be bundled in a short- or mid-term perspective. (2) code that is removed from the bundled code, until a separate maintainer is found for it. So, a policy of minimal control would have bundled code in emacs.git (and nowhere else), while elpa would be merely a staging area for it.