From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Tom Tromey Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: ELPA security Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2012 12:48:44 -0700 Message-ID: <87ehi6j943.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> References: <8738zf70ep.fsf@riseup.net> <871uejlbm1.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87623i5tld.fsf@lifelogs.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1356983332 30897 80.91.229.3 (31 Dec 2012 19:48:52 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2012 19:48:52 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Dec 31 20:49:07 2012 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 1TplM9-00047b-KJ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 31 Dec 2012 20:49:05 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:46320 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TplLu-00037X-Ph for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 31 Dec 2012 14:48:50 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:55218) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TplLs-00037S-2y for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 31 Dec 2012 14:48:49 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TplLq-0006BV-V4 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 31 Dec 2012 14:48:48 -0500 Original-Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:3653) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TplLq-0006BL-O8 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 31 Dec 2012 14:48:46 -0500 Original-Received: from int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id qBVJmjrO031593 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Mon, 31 Dec 2012 14:48:45 -0500 Original-Received: from barimba (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id qBVJmibB004493 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 31 Dec 2012 14:48:44 -0500 X-Attribution: Tom In-Reply-To: <87623i5tld.fsf@lifelogs.com> (Ted Zlatanov's message of "Mon, 31 Dec 2012 06:50:06 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.2.90 (gnu/linux) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.67 on 10.5.11.11 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 209.132.183.28 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:156038 Archived-At: >>>>> "Ted" == Ted Zlatanov writes: Ted> 1. add DVCS support to package.el, supporting Git and Bazaar, with the Ted> notion of "pull packages from repo X at tag/commit Y" in addition to the Ted> current "pull packages from URLs". The VC package has to be involved Ted> here, instead of writing custom code. What is the reason for this? FWIW, I considered and rejected this approach when writing package.el. My reason was that I wanted packaging not to require any external tools, so it would be available to all Emacs users. Also, KISS. Mixing in VC seems to add a lot of potential failure modes. Tom