From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stephen Leake Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: ELPA policy Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 17:23:00 -0600 Message-ID: <86twot782z.fsf@stephe-leake.org> 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> <83ziynma4s.fsf@gnu.org> <5640C6A0.5010709@yandex.ru> <83twovm9es.fsf@gnu.org> <868u65afvh.fsf@stephe-leake.org> <83r3jxlmfu.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1447197813 13879 80.91.229.3 (10 Nov 2015 23:23:33 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 23:23:33 +0000 (UTC) Cc: aaronecay@gmail.com, Stromeko@nexgo.de, dgutov@yandex.ru, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Nov 11 00:23:22 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 1ZwIG0-0007VS-8t for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 11 Nov 2015 00:23:20 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:36109 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZwIG0-0002PN-56 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 18:23:20 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:47210) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZwIFw-0002Os-AQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 18:23:17 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZwIFt-0003uL-5X for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 18:23:16 -0500 Original-Received: from gproxy4-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com ([69.89.23.142]:57607) by eggs.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZwIFs-0003u4-Uw for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 18:23:13 -0500 Original-Received: (qmail 24773 invoked by uid 0); 10 Nov 2015 23:23:08 -0000 Original-Received: from unknown (HELO cmgw3) (10.0.90.84) by gproxy4.mail.unifiedlayer.com with SMTP; 10 Nov 2015 23:23:08 -0000 Original-Received: from host114.hostmonster.com ([74.220.207.114]) by cmgw3 with id g6P31r00N2UdiVW016P6ig; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 23:23:06 -0700 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.1 cv=Caqbutbl c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=CQdxDb2CKd3SRg4I0/XZPQ==:117 a=CQdxDb2CKd3SRg4I0/XZPQ==:17 a=DsvgjBjRAAAA:8 a=f5113yIGAAAA:8 a=9i_RQKNPAAAA:8 a=hEr_IkYJT6EA:10 a=x_XPkuGwIRMA:10 a=qtqOOiqGOCEA:10 a=pGLkceISAAAA:8 a=mDV3o1hIAAAA:8 a=W0P9iEjY2lFhXGm3JIAA:9 Original-Received: from [76.218.37.33] (port=52999 helo=TAKVER2) by host114.hostmonster.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1ZwIFl-0007vQ-Dk; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 16:23:05 -0700 In-Reply-To: (John Wiegley's message of "Tue, 10 Nov 2015 10:54:51 -0800") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (windows-nt) X-Identified-User: {2442:host114.hostmonster.com:stephele:stephe-leake.org} {sentby:smtp auth 76.218.37.33 authed with stephen_leake@stephe-leake.org} X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 69.89.23.142 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:193997 Archived-At: John Wiegley writes: >>>>>> Eli Zaretskii writes: > >>> Large packages like CEDET should move outside of Emacs.git and into >>> Elpa.git. >> "Should" based on what? just the fact that it's large? I think we should >> decide this stuff on a case by case basis. For example: > > I'm surprised you say this, Eli, because in another thread you agree that > packages like this should be in Elpa, didn't you? > >>> If xref.el depends on CEDET, it would move to Elpa.git as well. > >> IMO, the exact opposite: if there are core features that we want to be in >> Emacs no matter what, and those features depend on a package which could be >> a candidate to move to ELPA, that package should NOT move to ELPA. > > Core should provide functionality along the lines of a "standard library" and > a "standard environment", where having them in core is as much a statement > about consistency of interface, as it is about universal availability of the > functionality. Right. Since CEDET provides lots of interesting infrastrucure, I assumed it was part of the Emacs standard library. But I also see no reason not to have two levels of "standard infrastructure"; one in core Emacs, on in ELPA. That said, moving CEDET out of core to ELPA can be seen as a demotion. For example, I was assuming that the EDE package system should be prefered over any package system that is in ELPA, precisely because it is in Emacs git. So I was spending my time improving EDE, rather than some other ELPA package. That aspect should be considered. In other emails, I've said "CEDET is a tarball package; in Emacs git solely to be included in the tarball". Is it fair to add "also because it is approved as part of the standard Emacs library"? > Since xref.el does not need to depend on CEDET, I don't see a reason why it > should, causing CEDET to remain in core. I would object to moving CEDET to ELPA git if it were not easy to refactor the current dependency to still be provided by an ELPA package. -- -- Stephe