some feedback on package.el changes

some feedback on package.el changes

[Nic Ferrier]

I love these changes to package.el, they're great.

But I am annoyed at the way they've been done. It breaks the existing
API all over the place and this is a minor release.

It was certainly unexpected to me.

I am using the pre-test so it's my fault I guess.

But anyone who isn't tracking this and depends on the package API will
be very surprised when the new version lands.



Nic

Re: some feedback on package.el changes

[Stefan Monnier]

> I love these changes to package.el, they're great.
> But I am annoyed at the way they've been done.  It breaks the existing
> API all over the place and this is a minor release.

There was no API (package.el was only meant to provide a UI).
As an API it was fundamentally broken (and probably is to some extent),
so there was no way to fix the API without breaking compatibility (and
compatibility will probably need to be broken again when the remaining
problems get fixed).

If you use the "API", then you had better participate actively here,
explaining what you need, providing patches to improve package.el for
your advantage.


        Stefan

Re: some feedback on package.el changes

[Nic Ferrier]

Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes:

> There was no API (package.el was only meant to provide a UI).
> As an API it was fundamentally broken (and probably is to some extent),
> so there was no way to fix the API without breaking compatibility (and
> compatibility will probably need to be broken again when the remaining
> problems get fixed).

Yeah. I thought that you would say that.


Nic Ferrier

Re: some feedback on package.el changes

[Rüdiger Sonderfeld]

On Wednesday 21 May 2014 17:00:42 Stefan Monnier wrote:
> There was no API (package.el was only meant to provide a UI).
> As an API it was fundamentally broken (and probably is to some extent),
> so there was no way to fix the API without breaking compatibility (and
> compatibility will probably need to be broken again when the remaining
> problems get fixed).

It might not have been intended as an API but there are several projects using 
it.  E.g., el-get got broken several times due to the package.el changes as 
well: https://github.com/dimitri/el-get/pull/1756

Regards,
Rüdiger

Re: some feedback on package.el changes

[Stefan Monnier]

>> There was no API (package.el was only meant to provide a UI).
>> As an API it was fundamentally broken (and probably is to some extent),
>> so there was no way to fix the API without breaking compatibility (and
>> compatibility will probably need to be broken again when the remaining
>> problems get fixed).
> It might not have been intended as an API but there are several
> projects using it.

Yes, I know, and the text you quote explains that there was no way not
to break them (and it also explains that they should get more involved
with the development of package.el if they want to avoid further
breakage).


        Stefan

Re: some feedback on package.el changes

[Sebastian Wiesner]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 900 bytes --]

2014-05-21 22:32 GMT+02:00 Nic Ferrier <nferrier@ferrier.me.uk>:

> I love these changes to package.el, they're great.
>
> But I am annoyed at the way they've been done. It breaks the existing
> API all over the place and this is a minor release.
>

You may be interested in EPL [1], which provides a convenient API around
package.el and is compatible with all package.el versions from Emacs 23 up
to Emacs 24.4.  It is the result of porting Cask to the new package.el
interface in Emacs 24.4.

It is part of Cask since about half a year now, basically since the
package.el changes hit Emacs trunk, and is mostly covered by ERT tests, so
it is fairly stable.


The documentation is currently only in the docstrings and the commentary.
If there is interest, though, I can compile a proper manual, and include it
in the EPL package, for reading in Emacs Info reader.

[1]: https://github.com/cask/epl/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1349 bytes --]

Re: some feedback on package.el changes

[Bozhidar Batsov]

What are the changes in question? It seems I totally missed them.

Cheers,
Bozhidar

On 21 May 2014, at 23:32, Nic Ferrier wrote:

> I love these changes to package.el, they're great.
>
> But I am annoyed at the way they've been done. It breaks the existing
> API all over the place and this is a minor release.
>
> It was certainly unexpected to me.
>
> I am using the pre-test so it's my fault I guess.
>
> But anyone who isn't tracking this and depends on the package API will
> be very surprised when the new version lands.
>
>
>
> Nic

Re: some feedback on package.el changes

[Nic Ferrier]

The internal API (which Stefan says didn't exist) changed from lists to
cl-structs.

But it didn't exist. So it's OK really.


"Bozhidar Batsov" <bozhidar.batsov@gmail.com> writes:

> What are the changes in question? It seems I totally missed them.
>
> Cheers,
> Bozhidar
>
> On 21 May 2014, at 23:32, Nic Ferrier wrote:
>
>> I love these changes to package.el, they're great.
>>
>> But I am annoyed at the way they've been done. It breaks the existing
>> API all over the place and this is a minor release.
>>
>> It was certainly unexpected to me.
>>
>> I am using the pre-test so it's my fault I guess.
>>
>> But anyone who isn't tracking this and depends on the package API will
>> be very surprised when the new version lands.
>>
>>
>>
>> Nic