From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: A proposal for removing obsolete packages Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 16:49:55 -0500 Message-ID: References: Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=Utf-8 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1452635426 19207 80.91.229.3 (12 Jan 2016 21:50:26 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 21:50:26 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Andrew Hyatt Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jan 12 22:50:07 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1aJ6pK-0002tw-Jm for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 22:50:06 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:34240 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aJ6pG-0004Ec-Mw for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 16:50:02 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:58997) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aJ6pC-0004Bl-DH for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 16:49:59 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aJ6pB-0004eW-KT for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 16:49:58 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:47067) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aJ6pA-0004dz-2X; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 16:49:56 -0500 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1aJ6p9-000796-Jv; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 16:49:55 -0500 In-reply-to: (message from Andrew Hyatt on Tue, 12 Jan 2016 00:25:13 -0500) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:198102 Archived-At: [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider ]]] [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]] [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]] > > > For example, a package that is declared obsolete during the development > > > of Emacs 25 would be moved to obsolete, and a message would be added to > > > say that " is obsolete and will be removed in Emacs 27". It > > > couldn't be removed in Emacs 26 because it didn't start Emacs 25 in > > > obsolete. > > > > I agree. But we should not be rigit about deleting it in Emacs 27, > > either. Depending on how the feature is used, we might want to save > > it longer. Features used in Lisp code may need to remain longer. > Could we instead not move things into obsolete if we didn't think they > were removable? Moving them to 'obsolete' would be done at the first step, according to that proposal. The question I am raising is when to delete them entirely. > Also, can you give an example of something that is obsolete but > shouldn't be removed? That might help me understand your concern. defadvice might be a good example. -- Dr Richard Stallman President, Free Software Foundation (gnu.org, fsf.org) Internet Hall-of-Famer (internethalloffame.org) Skype: No way! See stallman.org/skype.html.