On Mon, Oct 24, 2022, at 18:00, Philip Kaludercic wrote: > Jostein Kjønigsen 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.