Re: Allowing rolling release packages on ELPA

["Jostein Kjønigsen" <jostein@secure.kjonigsen.net>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1435 bytes --]


On Mon, Oct 24, 2022, at 18:00, Philip Kaludercic wrote:
> Jostein Kjønigsen <jostein@secure.kjonigsen.net> writes:
> 
> > On 24.10.2022 08:14, Bozhidar Batsov wrote:
> >> The patch seems fine to me, but I'm a bit skeptical about the whole
> >> rolling releases idea in general
> >
> > This is the default operation for MELPA, which arguably has more
> > popular packages than ELPA.
> 
> To my knowledge all of the major packages on MELPA are also available
> via GNU or NonGNU ELPA, so I don't know if this is really an argument.
> 
> >> How hard it is for people to actually update version timestamps
> >> themselves or to just stick to the *-devel repos if they don't want
> >> to cut releases?
> >
> > As a package-developer, I may release patches weekly, but I update
> > main versions maybe once every second year, if/when someone bothers me
> > about it.
> >
> > Not having to version things manually is a god-send.
> 
> It really depends, I am certainly no recommending to enable this by
> default.  The idea is just to accommodate people like you who prefer
> this mode of publishing releases.
> 

I’m not arguing it should be the default, for everyone. 

I’m just supporting having rolling releases as a possibility. Lots of users and developers prefer it that way. 

In fact that’s how I (as a user) consume Emacs: git pull and build. I’m not waiting for official tagged versions. 

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2191 bytes --]