Re: NonGNU ELPA: Conditions for accepting a potential new package 'rmsbolt' ?

[Philip Kaludercic <philipk@posteo.net>]

Jay Kamat <jaygkamat@gmail.com> writes:

> Philip Kaludercic <philipk@posteo.net> writes:
>
>> Jay Kamat <jaygkamat@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> Philip Kaludercic <philipk@posteo.net> writes:
>>>
>>> Might take me a while to fully review and test all the changes, but
>>> they look good, so once I do so, I'll include them!
>>>
>>>> +(defcustom rmsbolt-mode-lighter " RMS🗲"	;could the unicode
>>>> charachter be removed?  it can unnecessarily resize the mode line.
>>>
>>> Sure - I can remove it. I'll do it after I apply your patch generally.
>>
>> Just keep in mind that I didn't send a patch.  I just find it convenient
>> to send comments in form of a diff.
>
> Ah - I didn't realize. I think most of your code-changes are good, is
> it alright if I apply them? I'll make a commit with you as the author
> (or I can take authorship/not commit them - whatever your preference
> is).

Of course, I just wanted to make sure that you don't apply a comment
instead of addressing it.  Also, some changes might have been
opinionated (I don't recall), and I wouldn't want to insinuate that you
must apply them.

I don't care about authorship, do as you like.

>>>>
>>>>  ;;;;; Starter Definitions
>>>>
>>>>  ;; IIUC, this "starter" business is not a necessary part of
>>>> RMSBolt, but  is
>>>>  ;; a way to provide sample files with which users can try out RMSBolt.
>>>>
>>>> -(defvar rmsbolt-starter-files
>>>> +(defvar rmsbolt-starter-files		;should this be part
>>>> of a secondary file that isn't loaded by default?
>>>
>>> Maybe - I think I would load it by default though - as this is the
>>> easiest way for someone to try out the package. In my personal usage I
>>> almost always start from one of these files and add my changes. I
>>> should update the comment above with that information as well.
>>
>> It shouldn't matter, as long as the command that uses
>> `rmsbolt-starter-files' remains auto-loaded, even if the command is
>> not defined in the main file.
>
> Ah - that's true! I'll try to make this change after the others if I
> have time.

1+

-- 
	Philip Kaludercic on peregrine