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: Moving packages out of core to ELPA Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2024 16:17:01 +0200 Message-ID: <8634tpsvqa.fsf@gnu.org> References: <86sf1qsxs9.fsf@gnu.org> <86r0has2v3.fsf@gnu.org> <87il2lx4uh.fsf@yahoo.com> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="39746"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: luangruo@yahoo.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: JD Smith Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Feb 18 15:18:09 2024 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 1rbhzb-000A70-BU for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 18 Feb 2024 15:18:07 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rbhyf-0000zd-1o; Sun, 18 Feb 2024 09:17:09 -0500 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 1rbhyb-0000zC-66 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 18 Feb 2024 09:17:05 -0500 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 1rbhya-0002rs-Q8; Sun, 18 Feb 2024 09:17:04 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=4l0a2FgywYfFcXTXFfbwEoYL8F5JMcAvn1Ih0jSlpQ8=; b=bUIjwhoZN+wV SKoG3PM4Xq3DcpWyFwrRkhw21Uc4+4p/wJBAlYoYt5pimcFYwacJFkX8JPamSs12/S/3WnN+e4DBH /htsQTQX/rKVW+KJn3SfF2KS8/eQweVLP2hZQ7N/nw5ehrktrYSze9ySBRwmsqlr8GePsZgtQsv55 qkKI0dyUXGL3id5eLAbkPHmYhShyuSlyIufpGe6s34XCxg3kg9cusA2M2N7SAntpIK5IbKpmZ4NP8 wNCoUqR0DakCA2X111lGME3OjowC8+bJz1JFDyg6UB/x6KGtfDBfz7b9ik1/RarSHLwJMVMyezgq5 B90stMXXWIoONlTm55Goew==; In-Reply-To: (message from JD Smith on Sun, 18 Feb 2024 09:03:05 -0500) 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:316317 Archived-At: > From: JD Smith > Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2024 09:03:05 -0500 > Cc: emacs-devel > > git log --pretty="format:%an" lisp/progmodes/idlw*.el doc/misc/idlwave.texi | perl -ne 'chomp; $a{$_}++; END > {foreach $n (sort {@a{$b} <=> @a{$a}} keys %a) {printf("%30s\t%s\n",$n,"+" x $a{$n})}}' > > This reveals that an impressive 39 individual maintainers have had their hand in the code over the last 20 > years, some with more than 80 commits. Yes, many of these are find/replace typos or other "no additional > cost" commits, but many are not. You consider 4 changes a year a significant maintenance cost? Please don't, because it's negligible. I consider even 4 changes a day not too many. Look, why won't you two leave it to the maintainers to assess the costs of the maintenance, okay? You are both arguing about something you know only in theory, at least when applied to Emacs maintenance. I know this from practical everyday experience, and I'm telling you: the costs are negligible. Why isn't that enough? why do you insist on telling me what are _my_ costs? This discussion shouldn't have continued after the question was asked and answered. We are wasting each other's time by keeping it going. Let's move on, okay? My conclusion from this is that we can either move IDLWAVE to lisp/obsolete (and remove the relevant association from auto-mode-alist), or leave things as they are. Which one is better is up to the users of IDLWAVE (and I'm okay with either one), but either way the maintenance costs are not a factor. Whether to move IDLWAVE out of core to ELPA could be revisited later, but the maintenance costs definitely don't justify moving it nor leaving it; they are simply not relevant to that decision.