From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [External] : [ELPA] Package cleanup Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2022 04:35:56 -0400 Message-ID: References: <20220329004337.nzeew6dlyqxm7wat@Ergus> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="9757"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/29.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: Drew Adams , "emacs-devel@gnu.org" , Jimmy Aguilar Mena To: John Yates Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Mar 30 10:37:40 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1nZTpk-0002LJ-Hj for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 30 Mar 2022 10:37:40 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:52432 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nZTpj-0005e0-9H for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 30 Mar 2022 04:37:39 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:45888) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nZToK-0002r3-TG for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Mar 2022 04:36:13 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:32529) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nZToF-0007Q2-SU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Mar 2022 04:36:11 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 5E8C644094B; Wed, 30 Mar 2022 04:36:05 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id C597C440847; Wed, 30 Mar 2022 04:35:59 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1648629359; bh=uATM1WYY+QDpg3O+DP55yB1zEURHhxY7dx54VCsQDAg=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=MopEe7MPdaHGLpbfQXBbksyxjmoopn0fwHPYAeznBC7c4p5d7x3nNBJOs/bIOt7rQ colkSh0Hy0tu4xNvaOOnKtd/Bh1HHI//7FwLlrAVS0CWwVpWeX01laD7PXFOnA7e7b wENf3CmzoTXkuraoUJ2B2zyi/+Zk8oDy4picZJN+7XyepEU3t2KH1pXEfc+CoKbgk8 Jpl8UpmCYpHAx/cWnmBFBiK8eBf5DO0ejCueuencuKHbKvJEDo4BOfF1HBZ9IZ3Nn0 eYsdXFnA8qr1pLWLcOIRIx748QbAIbNxlWu8tQ/Ni77rauaJF0UirVoovLVwMp4/yU 0rNEYehzKu1mw== Original-Received: from ceviche (46-253-189-210.dynamic.monzoon.net [46.253.189.210]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B9A3E120484; Wed, 30 Mar 2022 04:35:58 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (John Yates's message of "Tue, 29 Mar 2022 17:41:26 -0400") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-Spam_score_int: -42 X-Spam_score: -4.3 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:287598 Archived-At: > I would like to assume that ELPA is a somewhat curated > collection of packages. Perhaps not as rigorously tested > and maintained as Emacs itself, but more so than some > package on github that has not seen an update in 5 years. That's not really the case, no :-( I do make sure the packages compile, and try occasionally to clean up the worst warnings, and when I make changes in Emacs I try to keep an eye on GNU ELPA packages to update them correspondingly, but I think I'm an exception in this regard. > If the only virtue of being on ELPA is that I can install via > package.el then that seems like rather thin gruel. The other is that there's a plan to include some of those packages into the standard Emacs tarball. > Perhaps the bar for admission to ELPA is too low. The main bar is for the package to be useful, harmless, and to have copyright. I don't see a strong reason to make it much higher. > Could we require automated tests that can be run regularly to confirm > package health? That would be great. But before requiring them, we need to setup a way to run the already existing tests. Any help in this regard would be most welcome. Stefan