>>> That being said, however, based on a recent exchange, the recommended >>> version that the maintainer of julia-mode wishes users download is the >>> "rolling release" equivalent from melpa. I believe it is for this >>> reason that they have not made a tagged release in the last four years. >>> Quoting below the maintainer's response on the issue ([1]) where I >>> brought this matter to their attention: >>> >>> #+begin_quote >>> Since we do not make stable releases (effectively, it is just rolling on >>> `master`, I think we should just clarify that users should use `melpa`, and if >>> possible expunge the package from `melpa-stable` etc. >>> #+end_quote >>> >>> [1]: >> >> If that is so, then we can also mark the ELPA package as using a >> rolling-release model, i.e. the build server prepares a new tarball >> every time is synchronises new commits. > > I believe that that would be desirable, and the accurate thing in the > case of julia-mode. Could you please confirm when that change has been > made. I haven't changed anything. Are you involved in julia-mode? > Additionally, could you please point me to where the "rolling-release > model" is documented? A search for "rolling" in > didn't > yield any matches. 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 That being said, I still think that this is a feature that we would want to advise package maintainers not to use. -- Philip Kaludercic on siskin