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: ELPA submission: python-import Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2022 12:25:53 -0400 Message-ID: References: <87v8rguhry.fsf@gmail.com> <83k07w6j87.fsf@gnu.org> <87r124ue1w.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="2745"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/29.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: Eli Zaretskii , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Augusto Stoffel Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Jul 29 18:27:34 2022 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 1oHSpq-0000br-FY for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 29 Jul 2022 18:27:34 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:36702 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oHSpp-0001Qy-DM for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 29 Jul 2022 12:27:33 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:60272) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oHSoT-0000ca-4N for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 29 Jul 2022 12:26:10 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:51948) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oHSoO-0000nd-QP; Fri, 29 Jul 2022 12:26:07 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 202E9100189; Fri, 29 Jul 2022 12:25:58 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id CDA74100102; Fri, 29 Jul 2022 12:25:56 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1659111956; bh=rMxPWwiMppa5F4v6+8dgcm+XD+XQLGf5eu2V18b0Yv0=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=mBwBKUuosA81NbkedlQV7q+kGnFaNbgpZsF2Hn+QYCPKIfOX1fB9dO+W/k0s9kxcL tC98iTGPG2lH0jULJha8gQqYobj668OE4gDDK+X+2b6PnKji7xDI03FBns3ctt0gGA LkA0QXk0D468+5zMTkIBsPdibVcOz2dL2HfbmM04+hVK4TtqOqhdnILDi47Sp5e9OG xkZ7wNlwOh+/DXGx456CsSorJ6MP9XbciZfvA+EAJK7IMCcsz62xKgk7CkHD4gro1w fudIFU/naiJThaeg0Feg+90mFbS6it6V6NqY9u2UjXKI9hHD0CfD/dGFVFuQUPQMu2 p0IDLCCTeQn/g== Original-Received: from milanesa (dyn.144-85-172-183.dsl.vtx.ch [144.85.172.183]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DC91F12022D; Fri, 29 Jul 2022 12:25:55 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <87r124ue1w.fsf@gmail.com> (Augusto Stoffel's message of "Fri, 29 Jul 2022 17:35:55 +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, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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:292844 Archived-At: > I suppose two things speaking against it: > > - The package depends on two external tools (isort and pyflakes) that > are popular but neither built-in nor de facto standards. > > - Sometimes the heuristics used there can be wrong (e.g. if relative > imports (IMHO usually a bad idea anyway) are used). I haven't used > the package enough to judge how much of a problem this is. FWIW, I don't find those to be good reasons to keep the code separate. It's quite common for some parts of the functionality of a major modes to be less thorough (e.g. depend on the presence of some unusual tool, or depend on specific conventions, ...): it's not ideal, but it's better than nothing, and also makes it "obvious" where to improve the code. IOW it can encourage further improvements. Stefan