You can add my voice to "I'd rather just have in ELPA (and we should be
moving more and more packages there).

There was some cool idea a while ago to have even Emacs stable releases
package some core deps directly from ELPA (similar to
what languages like Ruby do). That simplifies the maintenance of Emacs
itself and gives more flexibility to users to update stuff while waiting
for new Emacs releases.

On 15 April 2018 at 01:46, Joshua Branson <jbranso@fastmail.com> wrote:

> Eric Abrahamsen <eric@ericabrahamsen.net> writes:
>
> > Joshua Branson <jbranso@fastmail.com> writes:
> >
> >> That sounds pretty awesome, but does the bbdb package have any info
> >> documentation?  Not that it really matters, but it would be nice to
> have.
> >>
> >> Also, may I ask about ebdb?  Does ebdb ever have
> >> a chance at making emacs core?
> >
> > Probably not! There's already push-back on including more packages in
> > core, and the main argument for making an exception for BBDB (many
> > packages are already "aware" of it) doesn't apply to EBDB.
> >
> > Personally, I belong to the "don't put more stuff in core" camp, and am
> > happy keeping EBDB in ELPA.
>
> That makes sense.  The more packages you have, the harder it must be to
> maintain a stable emacs.
>
> >
> > E
>
>