From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Okamsn Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Adding package "Loopy" to Non-GNU Devel? Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2024 01:34:46 +0000 Message-ID: <77affe05-eab3-42c3-beab-f8f2d29e12dd@protonmail.com> References: <871ec398-df6a-44a1-a149-d0014f99b756@protonmail.com> <87wmqz1rr7.fsf@posteo.net> <87edd0z2t1.fsf@posteo.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="4556"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Philip Kaludercic Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Feb 28 04:20:26 2024 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1rfAUb-0000yL-Vi for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 04:20:26 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rfATi-0003Al-T2; Tue, 27 Feb 2024 22:19:30 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rf8qq-0001Wa-0O for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Feb 2024 20:35:16 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-40131.protonmail.ch ([185.70.40.131]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rf8qf-0004ER-BC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Feb 2024 20:35:14 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com; s=protonmail3; t=1709084095; x=1709343295; bh=izkX2JygdpYttDq3DP6RJ+m4pYmJrt0ObHtxNtEAgb8=; h=Date:To:From:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: Feedback-ID:From:To:Cc:Date:Subject:Reply-To:Feedback-ID: Message-ID:BIMI-Selector; b=RJRPqdBh/atN/StT0A4MXdOWq0qq+xTYmFRicn3xSFVNIXmUN6DCkM9il9782ErFs mYkdaofJCjXV+nbTWPymzTNPdO8hbRtf3i5k308EIC5dgJS7de4S36PJyOaKEVULDq 2w3QLmKaEkcPu/91kh6rdKF24MRrrdYsFBwuwHf3YVG0FmY74JMMjrpq05/HGpTbvh P52eagO1kHR1lGDfuFl6UFHDxOWtiRlNCI4ieJmJI2HiMZnqSWMX03tXx3CpZWHq0J DF+aR5ZN/GXAWINmdv0MEw05qn3I3nbG5+GgqsrLwBVgkxnLc2hxWGMBg/i3zDCRFE KhugI0m2rfBPA== In-Reply-To: <87edd0z2t1.fsf@posteo.net> Feedback-ID: 25935600:user:proton Received-SPF: pass client-ip=185.70.40.131; envelope-from=okamsn@protonmail.com; helo=mail-40131.protonmail.ch X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 27 Feb 2024 22:19:28 -0500 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:316603 Archived-At: Philip Kaludercic wrote: > Okamsn writes: >=20 >> Okamsn wrote: >>> Philip Kaludercic wrote: >>>> Okamsn writes: >>>>> I keep the extension package in the same GitHub repo as the main pack= age for >>>>> testing purposes. The Dash functionality was requested by a user, bu= t >>>>> Dash is >>>>> not used by the rest of the package. Because of that, I put the Dash >>>>> functionality in a small separate package. >>>> >>>> You are talking about the loopy-dash.el file in the same branch, right= ? >>> >>> Yes. >>> >>>> If possible, it would be better if you could at least maintain it in a >>>> separate branch. >>> >>> If I added the file "loopy-dash.el" to an ".elpaignore" file in the mai= n >>> branch and used GitHub Actions to push any changes from the main branch >>> to another branch containing the file "loopy-dash.el", would that be >>> acceptable? >=20 > Sorry for not answering earlier, this doesn't really solve the issue, > since the root issue is that when using package-vc or elpa-admin, you > still have two versions of the file in `load-path'. >=20 >> >> Hello, >> >> I figured out how to make GitHub automatically copy changes of the file >> to another branch when the master branch changes, and have listed the >> file `loopy-dash.el` in the `.elpaignore` file on the master branch. >=20 > If we were to disregard examples as those mentioned above, then this > would be an acceptable solution, but I'd rather not, unless you > categorically reject having two separate and disjoint branches. I would like to keep the development of the packages together, since I=20 still change the implementation details. Having them together makes=20 testing for breakage much easier. What if I also had GitHub copy changes into a separate branch that only=20 contained the Loopy package and the documentation files? This would=20 avoid having the two copies of `loopy-dash.el`. Would that work for=20 Package VC? >> I have attached a patch file. Are there any other changes that you would >> like made? >=20 > I don't think there is anything else (the only thing I can vainly try to > bring up is that having a diminutive as the name of a macro is something > I find peculiar, and I can imagine would keep a number of other people > from using the otherwise nice package, but it seems it is too late for > that now?) I think that it is too late, because it has existed on MELPA for a few=20 years with that name. If it helps, I was not thinking of it as a=20 diminutive, just the normal adjective and the slang usage:=20 https://www.thefreedictionary.com/loopy. I acknowledge that your point=20 probably also applies for the slang definition, but I still like the name.