Re: emacs-29 44ebd9cbd56 2/2: Eglot: explain how to update Eglot in manual (bug#62720)

[Dmitry Gutov <dmitry@gutov.dev>]

On 04/05/2023 02:31, João Távora wrote:
> On Wed, May 3, 2023 at 11:48 PM Dmitry Gutov<dmitry@gutov.dev>  wrote:
>> On 28/04/2023 03:35, João Távora wrote:
>>> On Fri, Apr 28, 2023 at 12:53 AM Dmitry Gutov<dmitry@gutov.dev>   wrote:
>>>> Hi!
>>>>
>>>> On 28/04/2023 02:39, João Távora wrote:
>>>>>        * lisp/progmodes/eglot.el (eglot-update): New command.
>>>> Should it be called eglot-upgrade now as well?
>>> No objection, don't feel strongly about it.  If you want to
>>> change it, go ahead, but remember to change the manual as
>>> well.
>> Ok, I did the rename.
> Hmmm, unfortunate.  I thought you had abandoned the idea,
> as you didn't reply to that part specifically.

I did reply, with a question.

> The problem
> is that Eglot 1.15, released in the meantime, now has
> eglot-update.  So I think we should rename it back in Emacs 29,
> sorry. Either that or release Eglot 1.16 asap.

I figured it wouldn't be required of me to fix the consistency of 
function naming in your package. But nobody else did it.

I don't think it's really important to keep backward compatibility 
between Eglot 1.15 and 1.16 (as we've noted before, only the latest 
version remains). And just like there's likely no callers of 
package-update out-of-tree, I don't imagine there's going to be a lot of 
Lisp code calling eglot-update as well.

Up to you either way.

>> Two more things:
>>
>> - Commit 44ebd9cbd56 also removed the call to (eldoc) from the end of
>> eglot-completion-at-point which has been there for a few years. Was that
>> intentional? Didn't look like it.
> Not intentional no.  Well, at least not for that commit.
> Not pretty, but I wouldn't worry about it.

So it's not a breakage? Okay then.

>> - Consider the issue that I brought up in
>> https://debbugs.gnu.org/62720#715  regarding (cadr (assoc 'eglot
>> package-archive-contents)). I'm not sure there's even a guarantee that
>> the available versions are sorted, but even if they are obeying
>> package-archive-priorities seems like a good idea. Though I can
>> understand if it's not your first priority in this command.
> Is this a problem that can affect the Eglot package
> specifically?  In which conditions?

The user customizes priorities for GNU ELPA and GNU-devel, and 'M-x 
eglot-upgrade' upgrades to a version from the archive with lower 
priority. Something like that.