From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: Yoni Rabkin Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: difference between elpa/README and Package Archive *info* Date: Wed, 27 May 2020 10:18:52 -0400 Message-ID: <87367ltq9f.fsf@rabkins.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="46183"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.91 (gnu/linux) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed May 27 16:19:30 2020 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 1jdwu2-000Bvg-Ic for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 27 May 2020 16:19:30 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:35808 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jdwu1-0007NL-Hp for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 27 May 2020 10:19:29 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:38946) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jdwtU-0006fB-5F for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 27 May 2020 10:18:56 -0400 Original-Received: from smtprelay0183.hostedemail.com ([216.40.44.183]:38780 helo=smtprelay.hostedemail.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jdwtT-0005tq-Aa for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 27 May 2020 10:18:55 -0400 Original-Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (clb03-v110.bra.tucows.net [216.40.38.60]) by smtprelay02.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F952B7E79 for ; Wed, 27 May 2020 14:18:54 +0000 (UTC) X-Session-Marker: 796F6E69407261626B696E732E6E6574 X-HE-Tag: way18_6305b3226d52 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 1641 Original-Received: from birch.rabkins.net (c-73-238-99-162.hsd1.ma.comcast.net [73.238.99.162]) (Authenticated sender: yoni@rabkins.net) by omf19.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA for ; Wed, 27 May 2020 14:18:53 +0000 (UTC) X-Ethics: Use GNU Received-SPF: none client-ip=216.40.44.183; envelope-from=yoni@rabkins.net; helo=smtprelay.hostedemail.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/05/27 10:18:54 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 3.11 and newer X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001 autolearn=_AUTOLEARN X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:251502 Archived-At: Hello, I'm reading up on how to include Emms in elpa. The info node (elisp) Packaging > Package Archives, describes creating a tar file and a NAME-pkg.el file. It mentions https://elpa.gnu.org specifically. But the README file at (https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/emacs/elpa.git) elpa/README states that elpa.gnu.org doesn't use tar files, nor do you need to create a NAME-pkg.el file. Is it that elpa.gnu.org is implemented differently? If so, the info file that references it should probably reflect how elpa.gnu.org actually works, how it differs from the "stock" setup, and why. Or perhaps the README is more updated on how elpa works than the info. In that case the info should be updated. What is the relationship between the info and README descriptions? Will they eventually converge? Thank you in advance. P.S. Since I can see no mailing list dedicated to elpa.gnu.org, I'll be mailing me various elpa questions here, unless I'm directed elsewhere. -- "Cut your own wood and it will warm you twice"