From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Engster Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: ELPA policy Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 21:02:00 +0100 Message-ID: <874mgtsjwn.fsf@isaac.fritz.box> References: <87ziyuaqhl.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> <87lha5snji.fsf@isaac.fritz.box> <87d1vhsmuj.fsf@isaac.fritz.box> <878u65slue.fsf@isaac.fritz.box> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1447185748 7130 80.91.229.3 (10 Nov 2015 20:02:28 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 20:02:28 +0000 (UTC) Cc: aaronecay@gmail.com, Eli Zaretskii , Stromeko@nexgo.de, emacs-devel@gnu.org, Dmitry Gutov To: Stephen Leake Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Nov 10 21:02:15 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 1ZwF7M-00035k-K5 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 21:02:12 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:35230 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZwF7M-0004kP-20 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 15:02:12 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:46025) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZwF7H-0004h2-Kt for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 15:02:08 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZwF7C-0000gl-VR for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 15:02:07 -0500 Original-Received: from randomsample.de ([5.45.97.173]:41997) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZwF7C-0000gF-N5; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 15:02:02 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=randomsample.de; s=a; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:Date:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Cc:To:From; bh=QK3zxzvhxnXHeyv22K98+WTU3ikwwXNwgaJ8O1UI8I0=; b=AYhnjOt/rAiLESV4gFBJCbFF98ttmjC7Vt1YjseUrFMSCKACn///8CJq/9DgRDJ4WXSMPXRK3Tm0ymymgojL1jv80Yk9m1aq5MBu8IpBaumSOBAOeg9/Qe54K0mhVhyO; Original-Received: from ip4d1645ea.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de ([77.22.69.234] helo=isaac.fritz.box) by randomsample.de with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1ZwF7B-0003VL-96; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 21:02:01 +0100 In-Reply-To: (John Wiegley's message of "Tue, 10 Nov 2015 11:43:53 -0800") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13001 (Ma Gnus v0.10) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 5.45.97.173 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:193952 Archived-At: John Wiegley writes: >>>>>> David Engster writes: > >> This is not about reaching a consensus. This is about you giving proper >> reasons for such a big change. > > To be clear, I would also put Eshell (though not pcomplete) into the category > of "big things that should be in ELPA" -- albeit, the subset of ELPA that will > be in the release tarball. > > It's hard to pin down why in a manner that fits in an e-mail. If Eshell were > in ELPA today, and we were talking about moving it into core, I would have > just as much trouble justifying that move too. Perhaps this simply underscores > the fact that we don't have an agreed upon ELPA policy we can all refer to. In my opinion, the main question is whether something provides infrastructure for other packages to use. This is precisely what CEDET tries to do. I wouldn't have much trouble with putting parts of CEDET in ELPA, namely those parts that do not directly provide infrastructure, like support for certain languages, project types, indexing tools, etc. > OK, David, I won't decide this by fiat. Let us decide what our ELPA policy > will be, until it becomes clear, based on that document, what should go where, > and why. We'll defer discussions of package movement until we have that in > place. It is still not clear to me what exactly is gained by moving core packages to ELPA. In my opinion, packages like Org, Gnus or CEDET didn't create significant problems for Emacs development in the past. On the contrary, it made sure that those packages were adapted quickly when larger changes in core were made. Those changes got synced back upstream by people like Bastien, Katsumi and me. So in my opinion, you are trying to fix something that is not broken. What actually *does* create problems are packages that don't have an active maintainer. The 'big three' however are not among those. -David