Re: Git version of ELPA

[Stefan Monnier <monnier@IRO.UMontreal.CA>]

>>> 2) If packages/js2-mode and git@github.com:mooz/js2-mode.git differ
>>> in files they contain, I imagine we'll have more errors or conflicts
>>> to deal with.
>> Yes and no: the "push" would simply force the github version to have
>> the same content as the elpa version.
> The push just after the removal commit would end up fine.

No, by definition "push" gives you an exact copy at the other end.

>> Yes.  The elpa-diffs email as well (a copy is sent to the maintainer).
> Never seen that working before. Is that a recent change?

Fairly recent, yes.  Of course, now it's broken again by the change to Git.

>>>> Currently, you can have extra (ignored) files only for singlefile
>>>> packages.  Multifile packages will package up whatever is present.
>>>> But it should be easy to add some way to list files that should be
>>>> skipped.  IOW, same as above "patch is welcome, tho you might like to
>>>> wait a bit".
>>> I'd welcome a suggestion for the exact mechanism.
>> A simple solution is to not remove those files from the `elpa' branch.
>> I.e. consider it as a "local change".  It might lead to spurious
>> conflicts when merging, tho.
> Not sure I understand. I didn't suggest removing them.
> What changes, and "local" to what?

Changes, as in "file removal", "file renaming", ...
Local to the `elpa' version.

> If you mean the file listing the ignores, I'm sure it'll be fine to keep it
> in the upstream repo, too. Maybe Melpa even ends up using them, too.

No, I mean not have any listing at all.  Just remove from the `elpa'
branch the files you don't want to see in the packages.

> Exclusions are fine by me, too. So, file name ".elpaignore", syntax similar
> to ".gitignore" (one glob per line)?

Syntax: whatever "tar" accepts.


        Stefan