From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Thierry Volpiatto Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: updating async on elpa Date: Sat, 01 May 2021 14:38:20 +0000 Message-ID: <87mtte5x0d.fsf@posteo.net> References: <874kfom16w.fsf@posteo.net> <871rarn69c.fsf@posteo.net> <87y2czll5a.fsf@posteo.net> <87o8dvty56.fsf@posteo.net> <87zgxf5zyz.fsf@posteo.net> <87lf8zrqym.fsf@posteo.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="29669"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat May 01 16:51:58 2021 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 1lcqyL-0007dM-DW for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 01 May 2021 16:51:57 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:60420 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lcqyK-0002ZI-HK for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 01 May 2021 10:51:56 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:50252) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lcqwq-0001ay-Q4 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 01 May 2021 10:50:26 -0400 Original-Received: from mout02.posteo.de ([185.67.36.66]:47453) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lcqwo-00044W-HF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 01 May 2021 10:50:24 -0400 Original-Received: from submission (posteo.de [89.146.220.130]) by mout02.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AFD232400E5 for ; Sat, 1 May 2021 16:50:18 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017; t=1619880618; bh=aCOERyzzrSiBgaBN/Ozr4HeLlcA+OCPLrYjow+Oi5gU=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:From; b=kXu7nKe8s7opp1JsGuuJrjaS7eAInQypr3gm0mW6rfGVBxyOdJVfOD1gqDy7AWNA3 70qLxXbZ5qqpNIC39g/X5oWJdHjY8utgC7z3BHDRBzH5m3RlNfIdl9aSOsSrLC2RAF dBajs7DidFmQwsJoH8GZQMovglmVWvUNnieVYbXyf3KPkS8WVd4NFj5PH8Uvd+9FYR 6a3h6ds0QKc6uGGUHIUE/G51ZSk/XoCCBw1f2q6lYT85D1R/IMy6zlHvIDxjIPwOiU gSITjvU85pXYXlLlxkLdxTenUHzCnyZizM40cnKSHdAwHuFGH/PsOjRSTMNDsN5tjv mSYIGCsfhwy7w== Original-Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4FXXGJ0G8dz9rxd; Sat, 1 May 2021 16:50:14 +0200 (CEST) In-reply-to: Received-SPF: pass client-ip=185.67.36.66; envelope-from=thievol@posteo.net; helo=mout02.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, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, 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: 2.1.23 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" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:268715 Archived-At: --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Stefan Monnier writes: > [[PGP Encrypted Part:OK]] >> Yes, the name I use -elpa- is bad, > > Really? It sounds like a genuinely natural and intuitive choice to me ;-) So I misunderstood what you explained :-) I meant the branch name. >> but yes a repository per repo would be great, in github organizations >> allow having one repo per package like in helm organization. > > I know it's more traditional and has its advantages, but currently it's > not really an option. I understand it is not possible otherwise I am sure you would go this way as it is much simpler an safer for everybody. >> What about ((emacs "24.4")) we don't care of 24.3, we are at 27.2 now so >> very far from 24.3. > > ((emacs "24.4")) would work, yes. Whether that's better than > ((emacs "24.3") (nadvice "0.3")) or even ((cl-lib "0.5") (nadvice "0.3")) > is for the maintainers of Async to decide ;-) So lets go for ((emacs "24.4")). >>> - 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. > > Why would it matter, since it's on GNU ELPA anyway? As long as I have not a safe configuration for pushing to elpa I want to keep the melpa configuration i.e. with the pkg.el to be sure users use the last changes. For now each time I try to push to elpa something bad happens. Of course not having the need of a special branch for elpa would simplify. =2D-=20 Thierry --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQHHBAEBCgAxFiEEI9twfRN7r3nig/xwDsVtFB0W75MFAmCNaqMTHHRoaWV2b2xA cG9zdGVvLm5ldAAKCRAOxW0UHRbvk5M9C/40P5kGvJFS+jn/1omcalIgep8CDXyo W+4lHngPl8Xtey+F697+l4nPe/0jYzp7mHt8dl8RPQ+ZnURwyF+fjWvKTOJobv24 71zVOafoDZwUvm081n4wNwqjBPyqcBv/87WGVB5GbKHhnO2TsnAtXg7SlsxEaj+y eKofOBnveq2nVoCBvvXGLg4g6IzuYSSuT8ngI0SCTt/zYe31DMToB9exQP1R2b6c vex+CQDosajq+lAy7UWS7VwDraJ28bWKCJUfP5YmG16u+vUKvRGxQ9YAcwrIMNZV APruztGJEv+wrj8PE6FunTQHho0yk0BYxIORZXhT0ZsK6Jmy3bseMByM70/GknrN puU62USFzYYOphRyVcqd4nxUWcbs6qtL1LI2fV/wt4xy7RjDfW5Le9S5jl9yJI9A EP7aR7Q+L2ddJcnV9KNYp7ErzEADQPaEZ5+ONP30E2PqoR+joe/M/HTAdMfvBNbu qldFM8tKtt80yOMDHC5SC8UrsWCYgT0W4zc= =yxQA -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--