From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Improving GNU ELPA Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2017 22:19:49 -0400 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1499826016 29789 195.159.176.226 (12 Jul 2017 02:20:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2017 02:20:16 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.0.50 (gnu/linux) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jul 12 04:20:09 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dV7Fz-00076M-W9 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 12 Jul 2017 04:20:04 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:49899 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dV7G5-0005Vh-BA for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 11 Jul 2017 22:20:09 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:46310) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dV7Fz-0005VR-CQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Jul 2017 22:20:04 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dV7Fw-0004i0-3j for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Jul 2017 22:20:03 -0400 Original-Received: from [195.159.176.226] (port=54877 helo=blaine.gmane.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dV7Fv-0004hB-TE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Jul 2017 22:20:00 -0400 Original-Received: from list by blaine.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dV7Fm-0006PV-Re for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Jul 2017 04:19:50 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 34 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org Cancel-Lock: sha1:Wb9ujpJfPDqphK55cvzKeQYY6yY= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 195.159.176.226 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:216518 Archived-At: >> - we don't want to fetch from non-GNU servers, so we need the maintainer >> to push to elpa.git explicitly. > > Not really (I think you hint at this a bit later): if the FSF hosts a gitlab > instance, or any sort of (multi-repo) git hosting, then developers could > just mirror their repos to that instance. Indeed, by "elpa.git" I really meant "some repository under our control". Currently it's elpa.git, but that could be expanded. > And in fact we already have this. ELPA could work just like MELPA, but > restricting the package source to Savannah. Then publishing to ELPA would > be just like MELPA, except for having to mirror to Savannah from time > to time. Note that allowing any package on Savannah would already be quite different, since people without copyright papers have write access to it (and we'd lose the write access for Emacs maintainers, as well as the elpa-diffs reviews, ...). I guess it would be marginally better than allowing any package from "anywhere" (e.g. when a package goes unmaintained, there's a process that could allow us to get write access), but it would add the hurdle of being accepted into Savannah, so I don't think it would eliminate enough friction to make a significant difference. Stefan PS: BTW, to clarify my position: if it were up to me, I'd get rid of the copyright assignment policy for GNU ELPA (and for Emacs as well, while we're at it), but I'd keep the "locally hosted in a repository to which we have write access, with commit-diffs".