From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ted Zlatanov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Forcing reinstall in package.el Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 08:55:51 -0600 Organization: =?utf-8?B?0KLQtdC+0LTQvtGAINCX0LvQsNGC0LDQvdC+0LI=?= @ Cienfuegos Message-ID: <87y67rytjc.fsf@lifelogs.com> References: <87sjy03uyw.fsf@lifelogs.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1292425523 1682 80.91.229.12 (15 Dec 2010 15:05:23 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 15:05:23 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Dec 15 16:05:18 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PSsuq-0000mr-5K for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 15 Dec 2010 16:05:18 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48054 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PSsup-0007Or-Bu for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 15 Dec 2010 10:05:15 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=56575 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PSsmY-0004TN-ND for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 15 Dec 2010 09:57:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PSslw-0004Kp-3u for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 15 Dec 2010 09:56:42 -0500 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:43011) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PSslv-0004Jx-NN for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 15 Dec 2010 09:56:03 -0500 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PSslu-00046O-3F for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 15 Dec 2010 15:56:02 +0100 Original-Received: from 38.98.147.130 ([38.98.147.130]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 15 Dec 2010 15:56:02 +0100 Original-Received: from tzz by 38.98.147.130 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 15 Dec 2010 15:56:02 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 34 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 38.98.147.130 X-Face: bd.DQ~'29fIs`T_%O%C\g%6jW)yi[zuz6; d4V0`@y-~$#3P_Ng{@m+e4o<4P'#(_GJQ%TT= D}[Ep*b!\e,fBZ'j_+#"Ps?s2!4H2-Y"sx" User-Agent: Gnus/5.110011 (No Gnus v0.11) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:6jW5WcdS8BSCmKuQYcuB/I8qGm8= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:133716 Archived-At: On Tue, 14 Dec 2010 17:27:55 -0800 Phil Hagelberg wrote: PH> 2010/12/14 Ted Zlatanov : >> On Tue, 14 Dec 2010 10:21:28 -0800 Phil Hagelberg wrote: >> PH> While doing development of packages using package.el, I often find PH> myself reinstalling packages using M-x package-install-from-buffer. PH> However, this is a bit cumbersome because I have to remember to delete PH> the old version of the package out of my .emacs.d first. It would be PH> nice for package-install-from-buffer to be able to take a prefix PH> argument or something that would delete the package before attempting PH> to install it. >> PH> I volunteer to implement this if it's desired. >> >> Asking the user to give a prefix argument puts a burden on them.  Can >> `package-install-from-buffer' figure out if it needs to delete the old >> package on its own, with maybe a y-or-n prompt at the end? PH> To be honest, I'd prefer it if overwriting were the default behaviour PH> for all installations, but I hesitated to suggest a wide-sweeping PH> change like that. =) I think that's reasonable, since the user chooses what to upgrade from the package list. Chong, Stefan, what do you think? PH> I agree that overwriting should probably be the default for PH> package-install-from-buffer especially; confirmation is unnecessary. Yes, that was the specific use case I had in mind. But maybe there should be a message with sit-for 2 seconds so the user can tell something tragic is about to happen. Ted