From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Suhail Singh Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Reconsider defaults for use-package-vc-prefer-newest Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2024 11:15:49 -0400 Message-ID: <871q17dasa.fsf@gmail.com> References: <87wmj7dftf.fsf@posteo.net> <87setvxyt6.fsf@gmail.com> <87jzf7o13b.fsf@posteo.net> <87msk3jr0u.fsf@gmail.com> <87setum5do.fsf@posteo.net> <87msk1520e.fsf@gmail.com> <87settknf1.fsf@posteo.net> <87tte8akwa.fsf@gmail.com> <878qvjaep6.fsf@posteo.net> <87cykvwixn.fsf@gmail.com> <87ikukrl77.fsf@posteo.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="39675"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Cc: Suhail Singh , Martin =?utf-8?Q?Edstr=C3=B6?= =?utf-8?Q?m?= , "emacs-devel" , Tony Zorman To: Philip Kaludercic Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Sep 25 17:26:35 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 1stTuU-000A8r-Jb for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 25 Sep 2024 17:26:34 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1stTth-0000lC-Ps; Wed, 25 Sep 2024 11:25:45 -0400 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 1stTkL-0006pc-FC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 25 Sep 2024 11:16:05 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-qk1-x742.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::742]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1stTkJ-0001Fy-1z for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 25 Sep 2024 11:16:04 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-qk1-x742.google.com with SMTP id af79cd13be357-7a9a3e731f9so604175585a.0 for ; Wed, 25 Sep 2024 08:16:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1727277361; x=1727882161; darn=gnu.org; h=mime-version:user-agent:message-id:date:references:in-reply-to :subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=+6vdGT4GyVZ8hDOaH/Y8NzcNAOoIuMuZ3LpO7li8m00=; b=ESYmyezEr/4Ho8lNX3h0xBUhx0L6R3PD9fC3Nbzy0pmC/z6DUxHS9AgClxLQofhOKV 0geqU8vEYYgsweBrfyPZV/3z+sCl3B9giSMi1T3QIm+cy3nGh6afUDj+TH0HvIodtWkW qnFS2rmphPHTSoJ4O+FIIiEHyoclHpPU5v8Tp7v136mKTHDp1WuUMZlTpGxuVemausmG IsjMR/dLZpxIg/3Qty5wTavF5bKv0RA1vi523YoMiVDiczgDuQoDRjnBrjznqwEVWJ6y qzPyRGzW1srZebEUBeGPuKwaICWkM1B/eteB4KhPdv/zpkiZria8OM78KJXjKdSMM1K4 Gfrg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1727277361; x=1727882161; h=mime-version:user-agent:message-id:date:references:in-reply-to :subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=+6vdGT4GyVZ8hDOaH/Y8NzcNAOoIuMuZ3LpO7li8m00=; b=Um9R5vdNfrnslaoRkd8KsVSusjpZE6+Mzrf4KlAgXHUoUdX/Nj2oQ3fETjazmNU0Qq NN8JGvJbb5E5ik6+gQKGvGOZVrOASeM51kJeBaIPCEQrc4tHOxlo3OZUZhvTA1lLDdoX 1p6AxuFP3zskkTXQtXV6SMhds6q+RDddXYii9gOJ5SJg23B9WioVqMYah3XvcmSTGGhY voajjZMpyE9FN/SUgo0/njr+dpsiZEoVf7NH01MI+erPZErt+5IeiYLZ0o6pP7cY340h Bw7OwQwpfiRnUk2mV0VV11Xv4WOnUuW9dpZYWaBgOo9YKVlOj6GtShUlXxoizga5fOJe aLSg== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCVr0Bf3O3WETKgcEXWABctYCguqmSxG+supIcSVfBfnGccJv+1zwSdtW1VQWqcp8XbvzmcT6mR8dadzRg==@gnu.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxnXiIGSU6j8f+tmLr069W0xMcFcUT3j2QOd5PqbDOihUKLCrrM xLygWokBzBEmX9LqmsoG0ZpW4blv7HVCMBEx8gJfRgGsvgMJY8D9 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFDh/aiYWVb78yXWuzimmGloh6qSMPO3RTma8PybrNlgM5bhcoXRyVQpOYzBpDkSKjVEFNbKQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:440c:b0:7a6:6447:19ab with SMTP id af79cd13be357-7ace744d49cmr530126485a.46.1727277361352; Wed, 25 Sep 2024 08:16:01 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from gnus ([65.94.70.53]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id af79cd13be357-7acde5cccd2sm181047385a.93.2024.09.25.08.16.00 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 25 Sep 2024 08:16:00 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87ikukrl77.fsf@posteo.net> (Philip Kaludercic's message of "Wed, 25 Sep 2024 12:07:08 +0000") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::742; envelope-from=suhailsingh247@gmail.com; helo=mail-qk1-x742.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -17 X-Spam_score: -1.8 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 25 Sep 2024 11:25:44 -0400 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:324073 Archived-At: Philip Kaludercic writes: > The idea is to add a "COMMIT MISMATCH" warning whenever we detect that > two packages have different commits. Which are the two packages being considered? >From my perspective, the following is the desired behaviour: whenever package.el has evidence that the same purported package version is being served via different commits in the various remote archives (that the user has enabled) the user is made aware. If the package versions aren't the same, then no "COMMIT MISMATCH" should be shown. I.e., the situation of interest is when versions match, but commits don't. If it helps, "NON-UNIQUE COMMIT" might be more accurate, but I don't have a strong opinion on the wording. > What this doesn't do yet is eliminate false positives, such as > different commits between a local version of a package and a remote > version. I guess we are only interested in differences between remote > packages, right? If the package is a local :vc checkout, I don't have strong opinions on whether it is considered or ignored. If the package is an installed version (via package-install), then it should be compared against any other version that has the same version number (i.e., in the same manner as a remote package would be compared). > Does MELPA annotate their packages with commits? Both MELPA and MELPA Stable seem to. I am basing this on the assumption that the result of button-describe comes from the archive in question. If there is a better way to confirm, please do let me know. > + (if (and (not (package-desc-dir opkg)) > + (equal ocommit commit)) > + "" ", COMMIT MISMATCH!"))))) If (package-desc-dir opkg) evaluates to non-nil, then the above evaluates to ", COMMIT MISMATCH!" which seems incorrect. > It is documented on the elpa-admin branch: > > https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs/elpa.git/tree/README?h=elpa-admin&id=9bd65395f1d4875915731ddbdd73a471f10d7794#n215 Thanks for sharing the reference, but why is this not in the default branch (which is the only one linked from ) to begin with? Alternatively, if the elpa-admin variant is considered the canonical version, why doesn't the link from point to instead? The comment at the top of the file states that the two versions "differ slightly". However, differences in the documentation of supported options (regardless of whether or not their use is encouraged) is not what I would consider a "slight" difference. > That being said, I still think that this is a feature that we would want > to advise package maintainers not to use. Agreed. -- Suhail