Re: Request to add Package to GNU ELPA

[Philip Kaludercic <philipk@posteo.net>]

Felician Nemeth <felician.nemeth@gmail.com> writes:

>> Some examples for why that would be desirable:
>>
>> - A recent addition that could be useful is the new "package-vc.el"
>>   (which I think should be distributed as part of the `package' package,
>>   but it could also be distributed as a separate core package).
>
> Elaborating on this example, I'd like to see the patch in bug#60418 to
> be merged.  It adds package-vc support to use-package.el.  But similarly
> to Jonas' other examples, it would be useful on an older Emacs only if
> package.el/package-vc.el could be updated.

I have commented on the patch in a different report (bug#61937).  Here
is a copy for the sake of convenience:

  I have to admit that I am not a fan of this [adding package-vc support
  to use-package].  Personally I install all my packages using regular
  tarballs, and then manually select packages that I want to track in
  source-form if I am interested in contributing a patch.

  One has to keep in mind that by default you will be checking out the tip
  of the default development branch.  This is not what GNU ELPA and NonGNU
  ELPA do.  I know *some other* archives do this, but IMO this contributes
  to the instability that a lot of Emacs users experience in regards to
  the packages in the Emacs world.  Coincidentally I also believe that the
  popularity of alternative (non-cooperative) package managers like this
  "straight.el" boils down to the promise of being able to pin and revert
  to previous packages states.  Personally I believe that this is an
  up-side-down approach to solve the problem from the wrong angle.  The
  default approach to package management should be reliable and suffice.

> Thanks,
> Felicián
>
>

-- 
Philip Kaludercic