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: decision on moving core packages to ELPA; also move to obsolete? Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 13:50:10 -0500 Message-ID: References: <86a6ugnopl.fsf@stephe-leake.org> <83im94b17m.fsf@gnu.org> <834kknatxs.fsf@gnu.org> <83r1nqaph6.fsf@gnu.org> <83eejqak4s.fsf@gnu.org> <83mtyd8wep.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="23999"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: stephen_leake@stephe-leake.org, daniele@grinta.net, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Dec 16 19:51:19 2020 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 1kpbtL-00063C-Fj for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 16 Dec 2020 19:51:15 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:41606 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kpbtK-0000vx-Ho for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 16 Dec 2020 13:51:14 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:40368) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kpbsO-0000Bq-6N for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 16 Dec 2020 13:50:17 -0500 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:14934) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kpbsM-0004bA-2n; Wed, 16 Dec 2020 13:50:15 -0500 Original-Received: from pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id B0F4C805BE; Wed, 16 Dec 2020 13:50:12 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 071EA80712; Wed, 16 Dec 2020 13:50:11 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1608144611; bh=Yx6lUnhIkKienZ0hqL3kXe3TvYIagyInUYBFbcnyS0A=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=LnBpOHqWc4A68rBfKFkMyWpUetxFSo1IdjubyTdf9rJ1Rphy10vIslvbQNVW25YU7 7M4cW6CbQQBp6PEOujaNlbUfFkDWraWk3RsU4HQYNts6VMOsB+dvQerxZ4jcWZezej vdQGTSkEZQlQDO0t2nO69J1kqQXblWPFhGdX7dPdoywgGhG3/u8OvTjLKiJFuF4iQd d/R4NTNii0ffwKGZIsyQkxYTk6t9tXRmvt73HJzIzwkuT8PwX6fmnB28KToNVb485/ qJJpY94B7zd/t4pVsCXE/WsTPAJvZmC51kmW7qchYR7joy31JU7eP0AiYUPS05RMF5 CtRPjvU3/CK/Q== Original-Received: from alfajor (69-165-136-52.dsl.teksavvy.com [69.165.136.52]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BE79F1203CF; Wed, 16 Dec 2020 13:50:10 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <83mtyd8wep.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Wed, 16 Dec 2020 19:59:10 +0200") 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:261030 Archived-At: >> > Are you talking about something that already works, or about something >> > that _could_ work, after some changes? >> The sysadmin scenario I described is one that has worked pretty much >> from the beginning of package.el. > That's not what I asked. Then I don't know what you asked :-( Could you clarify your question? >> I guess at this point the question for me is: are you interested in >> finding a positive answer to the question? > Of course, I don't! I actually think that this silly idea shouldn't > have seen the light of day. I just need to present that in a sneaky > way so that no one makes me. You almost managed to fool me ;-) Stefan