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: GNU-devel and NonGNU-devel Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2021 15:25:43 -0500 Message-ID: References: <878s7m1mo3.fsf@gnus.org> <87ft1u9xhh.fsf@telefonica.net> <87o8giz61u.fsf@gnus.org> <87blchzo9b.fsf@gnus.org> <875z2pu0as.fsf@gmail.com> <87pn0wuv0b.fsf@gnus.org> <87mtvxii7u.fsf_-_@tcd.ie> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="5010"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Basil L. Contovounesios" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Feb 21 21:26:19 2021 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 1lDvJ5-0001Dj-TA for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 21 Feb 2021 21:26:19 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:33050 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lDvJ4-0005KJ-Vj for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 21 Feb 2021 15:26:18 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:40954) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lDvIa-0004u8-OC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 21 Feb 2021 15:25:48 -0500 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:42984) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lDvIY-0000x9-LV for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 21 Feb 2021 15:25:47 -0500 Original-Received: from pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id A7EAC8078F; Sun, 21 Feb 2021 15:25:45 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 2884880229; Sun, 21 Feb 2021 15:25:44 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1613939144; bh=BNDfYAkyIP2MGRKwC1GXyZhQTIco+0uEtn2mxY7coco=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=jAbJWmnY/S/ZzvAK/Utyo+uDkYuBdG8QTwoy9QslYA8tNIthEVJd6P2+SWhtmQiAE JrCnvgCRWDA81MLd3mdQfhxBXlXAWuXg0oTe3aNj7p7pEMgal/XAr/Aay8a03/UAkl P02wRWF8VRDVjqv8rEJOAcYxmaHZ7VPwIoyykxqABlj0nFoSY3f8EDXoB3KvMDtmOp xGM2q6x+xf8fUodj38BhFNASl3jXI9jFGjQstNaVsMK8cX4rxVslo9z/bza6ax1+Ss Aly3T/I0jzKs5jLdDFbFmdfvEHsai6ucwEfYoSTxvAju0kDsb+ewRVRty7pQBSOMn+ JqnFR8lSaF6HQ== Original-Received: from alfajor (unknown [216.154.41.47]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E9CED1203B6; Sun, 21 Feb 2021 15:25:43 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <87mtvxii7u.fsf_-_@tcd.ie> (Basil L. Contovounesios's message of "Sun, 21 Feb 2021 14:55:01 +0000") 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 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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:265441 Archived-At: > What are the exact differences in theory and practice between > elpa.gnu.org/devel and elpa.gnu.org/packages, and > elpa.nongnu.org/nongnu-devel and elpa.nongnu.org/nongnu? The devel archives contain tarballs which reflect the current tip of the Git branch (the one stored in `elpa.git` or `nongnu.git`, not necessarily the same as the one upstream). In contrast the non-devel archives only contain tarballs for those commits where the `Version:` was changed. > Are the devel archives intended as (possibly WIP) counterparts to MELPA? It can be thought of as following the model of the non-stable part of MELPA, but that doesn't make it MELPA to me at all since MELPA is defined rather by the breadth of its coverage. > Based on which criteria are new versions of devel packages released, and > are they subject to :auto-sync in the same way as non-devel packages? Sync'ing the elpa.git/nongnu.git branches with their upstream is somewhat orthogonal to the devel-vs-release archives: the sync'ing is always done between the upstream and the corresponding elpa.git/nongnu.git branch. This sync'ing is done for all package in nongnu.git and only for those tagged with :auto-sync in elpa.git. Once a sync brings changes to a branch, that will always result in a new tarball in the devel archive, but it will only result in a new package in the release archive is the `Version:` changed. > Can the two devel archives be used as drop-in replacements for the > default package-archives? If you're willing to use bleeding edge code, yes. > What are the pros/cons of doing so from a user's perspective? The risk of breakage? Stefan