From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Philip Kaludercic Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Adding the `prescient` packages to NonGNU ELPA? Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2022 19:26:40 +0000 Message-ID: <87len72lqn.fsf@posteo.net> References: <16193c73-ab80-04c9-558f-d5e6142f38f3@protonmail.com> <871qpydllo.fsf@posteo.net> <4a52210d-3e39-ed34-a7c9-c3ee6e2a7a68@protonmail.com> <11680a2c-b082-cfce-e075-9694ed06dae0@protonmail.com> <87ilipvk9t.fsf@posteo.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="13571"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Okamsn Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Dec 16 20:27:37 2022 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 1p6GMr-0003LJ-Gs for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 16 Dec 2022 20:27:37 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1p6GMJ-0008KT-Gf; Fri, 16 Dec 2022 14:27:03 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1p6GLz-0008GD-Oi for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 16 Dec 2022 14:26:51 -0500 Original-Received: from mout01.posteo.de ([185.67.36.65]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1p6GLx-0002hD-El for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 16 Dec 2022 14:26:42 -0500 Original-Received: from submission (posteo.de [185.67.36.169]) by mout01.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0D654240048 for ; Fri, 16 Dec 2022 20:26:39 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017; t=1671218799; bh=cRi2dA9Gy9MDDX3UfqCerJLoPNChQQFHm9iv791hOz8=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:From; b=YP/XYjaFsrgynVgfzxwKTRKq1ZWLFidU52kDjkGYVVBSPbZLQv9OFXfsW0GA+sWr1 9OmTwaryf/O1WRqcHi7+oFGDu0PjTo9QKt02YI6ERuf51StQcVzz5srTfA+UPRD4+a ilFiKzouEl+wNu2MEo6VwNSZaxfa6LnULBbGQ3LlfJdvtrymnjpKJR6wCRPJwOUJZm xe9Bsr6A1CIehs5QS/Rtvxv988cfGfoAm0gYvMivsdKTd/JyREDCGITrS8iM7OjUf+ yV8JrQd238J7FRSJQwe5EaTrfLmhs/sAcwKzP3ELaNRAPYPr5pb6xrn8KJ+qHItZxT sPPQsmOJTaRvQ== Original-Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4NYfH253ZSz6tmc; Fri, 16 Dec 2022 20:26:37 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: (okamsn@protonmail.com's message of "Fri, 16 Dec 2022 02:04:26 +0000") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=185.67.36.65; envelope-from=philipk@posteo.net; helo=mout01.posteo.de X-Spam_score_int: -43 X-Spam_score: -4.4 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.4 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:301519 Archived-At: Okamsn writes: > On 2022-12-05 17:21 UTC, Philip Kaludercic wrote: >>>>>> When I tried testing the installation of `prescient`, it installed >>>>>> an older version of the file `prescient.el` than what is current in the >>>>>> repository. This was the version that received an update to the version >>>>>> number, but how does the system decide which is the most recent stable >>>>>> version of a file? I might need to increase the number to make it >>>>>> install a newer version. >>>>> >>>>> Yes, ELPA finds the last commit that changed the version header and uses >>>>> that to prepare a release. >>>> >>>> OK. I will try updating the version number to make sure that was the >>>> problem. >>>> >>> >>> This was the problem. The installation works after changing the version >>> number. I have asked about the author's process for releasing a new >>> minor version. >> >> 1+ > > I have updated the files version number. The packages install > successfully from the built tar files. Are there other steps to perform? > > I've reattached the patch to this message. Unless there are any outstanding issues, and nothing more to discuss, I guess the package can be added. Just to make sure, as it was mentioned in another message: Bundling everything in a single package is not an option?