From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Who is in charge of GNU ELPA? Date: Mon, 18 May 2020 12:41:22 -0400 Message-ID: References: <83d0719u7s.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="124537"; 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: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon May 18 18:55:04 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 1jaj2e-000WI3-3p for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 18 May 2020 18:55:04 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:40884 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jaj2d-0007XT-5z for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 18 May 2020 12:55:03 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:60298) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jaipV-0002wR-B0 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 18 May 2020 12:41:29 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:50881) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jaipT-0005vc-FX; Mon, 18 May 2020 12:41:28 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 7CC2810024D; Mon, 18 May 2020 12:41:25 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id CA4EB1000F4; Mon, 18 May 2020 12:41:23 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1589820083; bh=OZjBuIrWHGdKSMZKryMo3DDUXmUlLuXaRkg58Tn/ln8=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=PRTgbhaTVocnuP4C1dN4cZjCVYQifVyPrjtIvFV68JHhDG2rOJdx/U1zqrXqpJXzf 1JY8PqKwW/Iq4ufyAgQs3dvfThG1eIRbhfPzHNL4IaKlEthndDa4N1JnySMhXbwt74 Z8PanxhNvoyjfvMEFlrTiPyc52RjLHKRMwYjE2P7TIaqfUZ/26+9QRu0sSfthJkcJx vjbhn0Bop/WB4eHsXzvoie+B7G+PodN1YxVPtn2tPDFdKQoaqrWyUMxBfIADMsAL+G 5mD7drYnLM+kHQj5rhczjUVm5Lg8lPdDHaYvTVTd34z5JaI9qEcurIumPyhzgXAn2q imjPSeRbjWnAQ== Original-Received: from alfajor (unknown [216.154.27.250]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 941F5120312; Mon, 18 May 2020 12:41:23 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <83d0719u7s.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Mon, 18 May 2020 17:46:31 +0300") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/05/18 12:41:25 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] 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_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001 autolearn=_AUTOLEARN 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:250780 Archived-At: >> Until a few days ago, I thought I was de facto in charge of GNU ELPA. > Not sure who you are asking, but from my POV, nothing's changed in > that regard. >From my POV it has, because having Richard come and undermine my efforts without even understand what GNU ELPA is about has significantly dampened my enthusiasm. >> But recently it transpired that this is not the case: I was told that >> I was not to add `s.el` to GNU ELPA. > > I wasn't aware that the dispute about s.el has ended, I still see > various proposals being made and discussed. One of the proposals that > can be very relevant is to have two archives, or two separate parts in > ELPA, in which case s.el could be put into one of them with no changes > at all, AFAIU. I mostly stopped following those threads: much too depressing. > So I suggest to finish discussing those proposals, and I hope we will > be able to come to some sort of agreement about some MO that would > allow everyone to live with that. Let me know when something's been decided. Stefan