From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: using use-package Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2015 09:25:06 +0200 Message-ID: <20150813072506.GA21389@tuxteam.de> References: <67cb463e-41f6-4f37-91ee-15d0fdb5ba9f@googlegroups.com> <20150812180621.32265.2E673ABE@ahiker.mooo.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; x-action=pgp-signed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1439450738 8349 80.91.229.3 (13 Aug 2015 07:25:38 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2015 07:25:38 +0000 (UTC) Cc: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Aug 13 09:25:34 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ZPmtJ-0004O3-Gb for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 13 Aug 2015 09:25:33 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:41260 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZPmtI-0008Oq-LZ for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 13 Aug 2015 03:25:32 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:48112) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZPmt6-0008OW-T3 for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 13 Aug 2015 03:25:21 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZPmt3-0006E5-Mu for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 13 Aug 2015 03:25:20 -0400 Original-Received: from mail.tuxteam.de ([5.199.139.25]:48343 helo=tomasium.tuxteam.de) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZPmt3-0006De-GT for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 13 Aug 2015 03:25:17 -0400 Original-Received: from tomas by tomasium.tuxteam.de with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1ZPmst-0005gt-3A; Thu, 13 Aug 2015 09:25:07 +0200 In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 5.199.139.25 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:106524 Archived-At: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 09:13:42PM -0400, Stefan Monnier wrote: > > Stefan is saying that many packages do things _wrong_. > > Actually, no. What I was saying is that several use-package features > are only useful if a package is poorly packaged. > > In the mean time, it became apparent that the reason for that is that > I assume people (will) use ELPA to install their packages, whereas > use-package was designed for the case where packages are installed some > other way. FWIW, and based on a recent experience of mine, yes, I think both ways are needed/useful and complement each other. Recently, I installed some package from ELPA (magit) and it failed to byte-compile. I've yet to investigate what went wrong (perhaps my Emacs version is too new/old, what have you), but I now find myself wrangling with the complexities of the package itself *and* those of the packaging system. So some "wholly integrated solution" makes life easier only when things work out (duh ;-) Otherwise it makes life harder, and what's more important in my view -- it tends to make a stronger separation of "outer circle" and "inner circle", making it more difficult to get involved. > Hence use-package partly overlaps with ELPA, and in those parts that > overlaps, the work is done differently: in ELPA the work is done by the > packager, whereas in use-package the work is done by the end-user (since > there's no packager doing that work for him). Perhaps the only problem is in this "differently": if ELPA and use-package manage to converge towards some set of common conventions, the end-user is only to win (whereas I'm convinced that there must be a first phase of divergence: how else are we going to explore different options?) regards - -- tomás -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAlXMRlIACgkQBcgs9XrR2kbkzgCggjAn2jW0iCGvTxwms7JJ5Ivn VegAn1E+BLPj/ENQOCgit2G1vf1aIJYi =j1G8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----