Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes:

> [[PGP Encrypted Part:OK]]
>>>>> <user>@git.sv.gnu.org:/srv/git/emacs/elpa.git ?
>>>> So no, it is not this,
>>> Yes it it, but this only specifies the repository, not the branch.
>> Hmm, I understand nothing how the elpa is structured, too complicated for me.
>
> When you push a branch you need to tell to which branch in the remote
> repository you're pushing.  The syntax is:
>
>     git push <repository> <localbranch>:<remotebranch>
>
> so if you're pushing from your local `elpa` branch to elpa.git's
> `externals/async` branch, then you need to do:
>
>     git push elpa elpa:externals/async
>
> I suspect the problem is that you used a shorthand which works well when
> the remote branch has the same name as a the local branch but can't be
> used here.

I will rename it to something else.

> I'm not sure how much simpler we could make it.  E.g. if we used
> a separate repository per package, then presumably your `elpa` remote
> would point to something like git.sv.gnu.org:emacs/elpa/async.git
> and you'd need to push to the `main` branch in that repository, which
> would still bring the same problem since the name `main` is still
> different from the name `elpa` you used for your local branch.

Yes, the name I use -elpa- is bad, but yes a repository per repo would be
great, in github organizations allow having one repo per package like in
helm organization.

>>> In any case, if you push to John's `emacs-async` on Github, I can then
>>> bring it into elpa.git with a simple `make sync/async`.
>> Done, the branch to merge on elpa is the elpa branch, not master.
>
> Any chance the two branches can be "unified"?
> AFAICT the difference are:
>
> - The `Package-Requires:` where `master` says ((emacs "24.3")), whereas
>   `elpa` says ((cl-lib "0.5") (nadvice "0.3")).  Not sure why they need
>   to be different: we can "merge" them to ((emacs "24.3") (nadvice "0.3")),
>   since cl-lib in included in Emacs-24.3 (OTOH nadvice appeared with
>   Emacs-24.4, so I think requiring only Emacs-24.3 is not quite sufficient).

What about ((emacs "24.4")) we don't care of 24.3, we are at 27.2 now so
very far from 24.3.

> - The `async-pkg.el` which is absent on `elpa` and present on `master`.
>   Do we actually need it on `master`?

IIRC yes, Melpa needs it.


-- 
Thierry