From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Phil Hagelberg Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Forcing reinstall in package.el Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2010 12:08:26 -0800 Message-ID: References: <87sjy03uyw.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87y67rytjc.fsf@lifelogs.com> <877hfau2g3.fsf@lifelogs.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1293654679 8881 80.91.229.12 (29 Dec 2010 20:31:19 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2010 20:31:19 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Dec 29 21:31:11 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 1PY2fp-0006If-29 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 29 Dec 2010 21:31:05 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:46188 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PY2K4-0001Cu-6W for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 29 Dec 2010 15:08:36 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=50266 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PY2Jy-0001Cd-UH for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 29 Dec 2010 15:08:33 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PY2Jv-0008BN-9n for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 29 Dec 2010 15:08:30 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-gx0-f169.google.com ([209.85.161.169]:35518) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PY2Jv-0008BA-6v for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 29 Dec 2010 15:08:27 -0500 Original-Received: by gxk5 with SMTP id 5so5196900gxk.0 for ; Wed, 29 Dec 2010 12:08:26 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by 10.100.48.7 with SMTP id v7mr3348639anv.194.1293653306204; Wed, 29 Dec 2010 12:08:26 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by 10.100.57.18 with HTTP; Wed, 29 Dec 2010 12:08:26 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <877hfau2g3.fsf@lifelogs.com> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) 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:134040 Archived-At: 2010/12/15 Ted Zlatanov : > I thought Phil was talking about an upgrade situation (version is same > or newer), not an unconditional overwrite even if the version is older. > Sorry if I misunderstood. > > I don't think it's an error to install the same version. You could have > modified your local version accidentally, for instance. In that case it > should maybe warn you, but it's still a good thing to be able to overwrite. Reinstalling the same version is very common for package developers. I'm only talking about overwriting files. Since different versions live in different paths, if you choose to install an older/newer version that hasn't been installed yet, you won't get an overwrite warning either way, so that question is really orthogonal. The only question about my proposed change is whether overwriting already-installed packages should happen automatically or require a prompt/prefix. I suppose it would be possible to have local changes to your packages that you want to avoid blowing away, so requiring a prompt is slightly safer. I will work on a patch that does this unless there are further objections. -Phil