From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Stability of core packages (was: Not easy at all to upgrade :core packages like Eglot) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2023 22:21:48 +0300 Message-ID: <83ildt808j.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87a5zj2vfo.fsf@gmail.com> <87leiwdyff.fsf@posteo.net> <834jpk5hih.fsf@gnu.org> <871qkom3fj.fsf@posteo.net> <83mt3b4yfc.fsf@gnu.org> <87edonlsxi.fsf@posteo.net> <83jzyf4vzb.fsf@gnu.org> <871qknllkj.fsf@posteo.net> <83fs934pjf.fsf@gnu.org> <87wn2fk47y.fsf@posteo.net> <83sfd2g2ek.fsf@gnu.org> <875y9yfxrr.fsf@gmail.com> <87y1muefks.fsf@gmail.com> <834jpifizy.fsf@gnu.org> <83y1mue1qi.fsf@gnu.org> <83sfd2e01f.fsf@gnu.org> <1a5e5837-513b-84d8-3260-cdbf42b71267@gutov.dev> <83sfcz9rf2.fsf@gnu.org> <09a49ab9-ac72-36a9-3e68-9c633710eba7@gutov.dev> <83r0sh8i1q.fsf@gnu.org> <35638c9d-e13f-fad8-5f95-ea03d65d4aa2@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="34648"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: dmitry@gutov.dev, joaotavora@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Jim Porter Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Apr 18 21:22:37 2023 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 1poquT-0008m3-H3 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 18 Apr 2023 21:22:37 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1poqta-0003sw-Rg; Tue, 18 Apr 2023 15:21:42 -0400 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 1poqtY-0003rB-AP for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Apr 2023 15:21:40 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1poqtX-0003Ne-Uf; Tue, 18 Apr 2023 15:21:39 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-version:References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From: Date; bh=IqKrZwH7e8g3EPyEH6OeVwFe5LELAZNZ+3DFwyGMchg=; b=DJNjAe/X8BSHazRcfDHU d6tAdzTS3K/5MTMV5OgwrtmgSEFTeFthg3kMb2AAWvLSNbaRIeNId+K14u14bkkbTcJ0+9tVZdp5g A/9qwrHy7xpYZvv0s8srtWYEN2nhHRX1aMEU2Fo4p0KGPhvcAppF+ND7RUW6sDseYL2zA5m+ho674 /L7qnGk93xIY65lyfohxpC8crlnO98VsjX4OZUpa1/PQEzZYfkveH0+X7ehzcdqwePn1o7yrUTKTT M4cyt4sp/XuKyILjVOjKRUm0TlbjaMT5KZ6VGkqHLrwwI1C3RRgPY6tn08jBUfVubE+2zSamq4TtK njXW59II02GW0w==; Original-Received: from [87.69.77.57] (helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1poqtX-0002F6-1I; Tue, 18 Apr 2023 15:21:39 -0400 In-Reply-To: <35638c9d-e13f-fad8-5f95-ea03d65d4aa2@gmail.com> (message from Jim Porter on Tue, 18 Apr 2023 11:56:58 -0700) 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:305418 Archived-At: > Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2023 11:56:58 -0700 > Cc: joaotavora@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org > From: Jim Porter > > On 4/18/2023 5:57 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > So this again goes back to the main issue: how should the stability > > considerations affect development of core packages and their > > "stability gradation"? > > It sounds to me like there are 3 or 4 levels (depending on how you count): > > * Stable: the version of a package included in the latest Emacs tarball > * Latest: the latest version on GNU ELPA (etc) > * Devel: the latest version on GNU-devel ELPA (etc) I think we need only two. Stable can move to the next version, since packages are released more frequently than Emacs. > However, this runs into the problem João saw: if your package (e.g. > Eglot) would strongly benefit from requiring a newer version of a > dependency (ElDoc), what should you do? Currently, the only options are > a) do nothing and let users have a worse experience or b) make the user > upgrade the dependency too, even if they don't particularly want it. > Neither solution seems ideal to me. How is this different from what we have in Emacs? An exciting new feature is sometimes deferred to the next major release if the release branch is close enough to a release. There's nothing new here, just the fact that sometimes useful new features could destabilize Emacs, so one needs to choose which one it wants more. > One alternative would be for packages to be able to *recommend* > dependencies. Then, Eglot could recommend newer versions of ElDoc, but > they wouldn't actually be required. This is probably needed, but it requires non-trivial support from package.el, to let informed users select the updates that fit their stability requirements and feature needs.