Re: CVS is the `released version'

[Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>]

>>>>> "David" == David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:

David> Once one has a central repository, there is no significant advantage
David> over not having packages but instead putting everything inside of
David> Emacs.

I don't agree.

The biggest benefit I see is that packages can be updated on the
package maintainer's schedule.  Emacs, on the other hand, is updated
on the Emacs maintainers' schedule.

There's also the fact that there are useful Emacs packages which will
never be included in Emacs.

>> First, many packages are released between Emacs releases; package.el
>> makes it simple to update to these releases and use them.  Second,
>> not every useful Emacs Lisp package out there is going to be
>> included in Emacs.  We've seen over the years that having a separate
>> repository is in fact very useful to Emacs users.

David> Who saw that?

Everybody who ever used the Ohio State Elisp Archive, ELL, or uploaded
or downloaded code from the Emacs Wiki.

Tom