From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Tom Tromey Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs Package Management Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 20:07:55 -0600 Message-ID: References: <485b0c380808011427n4d3144eey3f8daf3abac83bf4@mail.gmail.com> <87ej589vku.fsf@hagelb.org> <485b0c380808050609y56042595l42a5bb05b34458f0@mail.gmail.com> <485b0c380909161536t331a71fdg1c45150c418b72b2@mail.gmail.com> <87ab0eai3l.fsf@hagelb.org> <87eipqpwfi.fsf@stupidchicken.com> Reply-To: Tom Tromey NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1254276505 18822 80.91.229.12 (30 Sep 2009 02:08:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2009 02:08:25 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Chong Yidong , emacs-devel@gnu.org, rms@gnu.org, spedrosa@gmail.com, phil@hagelb.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Sep 30 04:08:17 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Msoc3-0008Jl-1L for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 30 Sep 2009 04:08:15 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59051 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Msoc2-0008UD-Cp for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 29 Sep 2009 22:08:14 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Msobx-0008U4-13 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 29 Sep 2009 22:08:09 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Msobs-0008TT-8o for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 29 Sep 2009 22:08:08 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=36532 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Msobs-0008TQ-3G for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 29 Sep 2009 22:08:04 -0400 Original-Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:56855) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Msobp-0000rz-Lt; Tue, 29 Sep 2009 22:08:01 -0400 Original-Received: from int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.16]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n8U27xtG011923; Tue, 29 Sep 2009 22:07:59 -0400 Original-Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n8U27wgf004409; Tue, 29 Sep 2009 22:07:58 -0400 Original-Received: from opsy.redhat.com (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n8U27uFY032476; Tue, 29 Sep 2009 22:07:56 -0400 Original-Received: by opsy.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id CA5B937818C; Tue, 29 Sep 2009 20:07:55 -0600 (MDT) X-Attribution: Tom In-Reply-To: (Stefan Monnier's message of "Tue, 29 Sep 2009 21:20:54 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.67 on 10.5.11.16 X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:115798 Archived-At: >>>>> "Stefan" == Stefan Monnier writes: Stefan> So basically, the installation process would distinguish the following Stefan> steps: Stefan> - install: may include byte-compiling and things like that Stefan> - activate: eval the autoload declarations, adjust the load-path, ... Stefan> - make available: setup the .emacs so that the package gets activated Stefan> at startup. >> package.el does this. Stefan> You mean that it "does" all those steps, right? Stefan> Not that it "distinguishes" them, right? IOW, it collapses "activate" Stefan> and "make available" into a single entity. Yeah, sorry about that. The reason it is this way is just that I thought the UI was better. Few people have asked for a separate "deactivated" state. Naturally, it is implementable. I still think the default on installation should be to activate; requiring two steps seems user-unfriendly. Tom