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 09:14:12 +0200 Message-ID: <86msrys0qj.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87h6i6y2ch.fsf@yahoo.com> 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="19848"; 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 08:14:58 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 1rbbO6-0004xh-ES for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 18 Feb 2024 08:14:58 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rbbNQ-00007y-Rm; Sun, 18 Feb 2024 02:14:17 -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 1rbbNP-00007H-QA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 18 Feb 2024 02:14:15 -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 1rbbNP-0001di-G9; Sun, 18 Feb 2024 02:14:15 -0500 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=+0r2p5lYsGDYRP+s5VdDqyIdnwSnAzpWbcV3lZpIS0o=; b=ABFECQmrZFO9m17R649c +NvrrfP6zzEEwKeZzPhT+RxoBK67AIH4o+QSAKDm4zeH47cAYvobBc2J8uoGN9gCSu49u0M6GmDhz E1EbtriU2OvyI+AcRFc2XDHW9A9VPd5fDA7Xeh+GMQGHBfnpydU2CeZ1KDIALN3HVKC6WS+ydzcie 23RszWL83rAKPhZy+XSRBuQli+wcXHjFf14qRw99wvPbSuQjtrujAq5TKjlo4Yy0UJTrKnblotClV JnDZDe6F6jR2Y5ZlqidCEDh9IgIRtH2U8hVTI6vW/TzN/fZY9ghUomqZoOyvJJMGpCW2ORr7QIS6f Wa0IZsVhyqt0SA==; In-Reply-To: (message from JD Smith on Sat, 17 Feb 2024 21:14:06 -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:316298 Archived-At: > From: JD Smith > Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2024 21:14:06 -0500 > Cc: emacs-devel > > > Why is it so essential that such > > packages be removed from core? What practical advantage does that hold? > > Many which I mentioned in my initial message. The most salient: > > - Reduces maintenance burdens, freeing time for packages that have more pressing issues. I have heard from emacs maintainers who have spent significant time trying to understand and fix bugs in IDLWAVE code that is likely unused (even by me). > - Removes "tripping hazards" for users who inadvertently activate the mode for unrelated files and are confused (this is not hypothetical: I've had numerous reports). > - Cuts down on "extra noise" in, e.g., the top level Info help. These are very minor at best. Some of them could be made even less significant by simple measures like removing the associations from auto-mode-alist. Don't worry about those; if there are still users of the package, leaving it in core and favoring those users completely outweighs the above disadvantages. > > A Lisp file is considered part of Emacs, whether it be in core or in > > ELPA. They are expected to meet like standards, and bugs (in the > > absence of a maintainer) are the responsibility of the same Emacs > > developers who respond to bugs that concern Emacs in general, i.e., like > > developers. > > Is this really so, in practice? I have packages in ELPA which are effectively untouched except by me, other than on first ingestion. And they draw updates from a repo I maintain myself. Maybe I've misconstrued the situation, but my understanding has been that core packages receive far more attention from maintainers. And rightly so, IMO: everyone has them installed, after all. Please don't be bothered by the maintenance burden of dormant packages: it is a non-issue. > >> It deserves support in Emacs. Just not, IMO, in core. > > > > Why not? Why does _anything_, to speak nothing of a package already in > > core, not "deserve" support in core, while deserving support in ELPA? > > Because in ELPA, users must proactively opt-in to the use of the package. For such users — those who have actively sought it out — in stark contrast to the vast majority of Emacs users, the benefits dramatically outweigh the costs. The costs are minuscule, so it isn't worth considering them in such cases.