GNU ELPA is the only repo that's enabled out of the box, so I call this an
advantage over the alternatives :-) On an unrelated note - I'm pretty sure
MELPA has about as many users as Marmalade, but I think your library is
available there as well.


On 12 July 2013 08:29, Andrew Hyatt <ahyatt@gmail.com> wrote:

> What is involved is putting this on GNU ELPA?  I can certain do that, and
> maintain it there, but since my package is already available via Marmalade,
> it is already available via an ELPA that (I think) most ELPA-users are
> using.  Is there a further advantage to putting this on the GNU ELPA
> specifically?
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 4:32 AM, Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>wrote:
>
>> > I'm wondering if it anyone thinks this should just be part of the emacs
>> > distribution (probably under the "net" directory).  I personally think
>> that
>> > library-type modules such as this should just be included in emacs, but
>> > there isn't anything particularly wrong with it being available via
>> ELPA as
>> > it is now.
>>
>> It sounds like something that should definitely be in GNU ELPA if you're
>> willing to maintain it from there.  Maybe even in Emacs proper, tho I'd
>> have to think a bit more about it.
>>
>>
>>         Stefan "out of town"
>>
>
>