From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David De La Harpe Golden Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Integrating package.el Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2010 22:56:33 +0000 Message-ID: <4B870021.8090201@harpegolden.net> References: <87d41rn3wt.fsf_-_@hagelb.org> <87k4vxiwlj.fsf@lifelogs.com> <878wcdjg9r.fsf@hagelb.org> <87637gh73j.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87637b96pc.fsf@hagelb.org> <87wrzr6ugo.fsf@hagelb.org> <87ocl242jc.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87d41ihx9g.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87ocl167wx.fsf@hagelb.org> <8763795zsh.fsf@hagelb.org> <87r5pmwcf8.fsf@hagelb.org> <87ocjh2hyp.fsf@lifelogs.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1267138637 6650 80.91.229.12 (25 Feb 2010 22:57:17 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2010 22:57:17 +0000 (UTC) Cc: elpa@tromey.com To: Emacs developers Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Feb 25 23:57:13 2010 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 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NkmdT-00006n-BU for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 25 Feb 2010 23:56:48 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55280 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NkmdR-000640-U4 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 25 Feb 2010 17:56:45 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NkmdO-00063k-2a for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 25 Feb 2010 17:56:42 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=50076 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NkmdM-00063Z-VR for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 25 Feb 2010 17:56:41 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NkmdL-00029H-DJ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 25 Feb 2010 17:56:40 -0500 Original-Received: from harpegolden.net ([65.99.215.13]:34216) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NkmdL-000290-8Z for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 25 Feb 2010 17:56:39 -0500 Original-Received: from [87.198.54.37] (87-198-54-37.ptr.magnet.ie [87.198.54.37]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "David De La Harpe Golden", Issuer "David De La Harpe Golden Personal CA rev 3" (verified OK)) by harpegolden.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2DE98E2C; Thu, 25 Feb 2010 22:56:36 +0000 (GMT) User-Agent: Mozilla-Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (X11/20091109) In-Reply-To: X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.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:121376 Archived-At: Stefan Monnier wrote: >> What remains to be done to make package.el a part of Emacs? I think >> Dan Nicolaescu's suggestion about menus makes sense. Is there anything >> else? > > For me, the only thing holding it back is the ability to concurrently > install different versions of the same package. > I find _calling_ the facility "package" of (minor) concern. Clearly it's not package as in Common Lisp package::symbol Obviously, Emacs Lisp is not Common Lisp and there's more than enough precedent for the other "package" usage from elsewhere, I expect most Emacs users would in fact be more used to it from GNU+Linux distros for starters. But could maybe just add something like this to the ELPA FAQ? Though it should be fairly obvious, newbies who don't know some core differences between Emacs Lisp and Common Lisp may be briefly caught out: Q. Does this implement Common Lisp style "packages" (of symbols) for Emacs Lisp? A. No, it does not, neither as its primary goal nor as an implementation detail. Think "package" purely as in "program code distribution bundle". Note that the fact that a Common Lisp "program code distribution bundle"* is typically a bundle of some program code that defines and then defines itself in a particular Common Lisp "package of symbols" is an aspect of Common Lisp language and conventions completely irrelevant for and alien to Emacs Lisp. * sometimes referred to as a "package" even in the Common Lisp world.