From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs release and bundling GNU Elpa Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 21:49:41 +0300 Message-ID: <83k2uvh92y.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83si9jhi5u.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1434999020 29605 80.91.229.3 (22 Jun 2015 18:50:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 18:50:20 +0000 (UTC) Cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: bruce.connor.am@gmail.com Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jun 22 20:50:09 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Z76nI-0007ip-RE for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 22 Jun 2015 20:50:09 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:41523 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z76nH-0003ND-Ub for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 22 Jun 2015 14:50:07 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:43703) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z76nB-0003Jb-8l for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 22 Jun 2015 14:50:04 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z76n8-0003zA-0v for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 22 Jun 2015 14:50:01 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout23.012.net.il ([80.179.55.175]:37203) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z76n7-0003y2-P6 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 22 Jun 2015 14:49:57 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout23.012.net.il by a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0NQD00J0007USO00@a-mtaout23.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 22 Jun 2015 21:49:55 +0300 (IDT) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0NQD00JRY0B7QT20@a-mtaout23.012.net.il>; Mon, 22 Jun 2015 21:49:55 +0300 (IDT) In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 X-Received-From: 80.179.55.175 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:187392 Archived-At: > Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 18:45:50 +0100 > From: Artur Malabarba > Cc: Stefan Monnier , emacs-devel > > > Fair disclosure: I don't like this "move to ELPA" attitude. I think > > the net result will be more bugs because of unsynchronized development > > Why would it unsynchronise? Because Emacs development adds new features that the packages may or may not want to use, and Emacs deprecates obsolete features that the packages may or may not want to remove. When a single team handles that, the policy is always consistent; not so when independent teams with independent agendas do the same. > > and less exposure of packages to people who track development on > > master, > > These packages will effectively be part of master. Only if one decides to pull them. Since that's at least a bit of an additional hassle, one could decide not to bother. > > . We'd need to find a way of providing ChangeLogs for the packages, > > either by merging their Git logs somehow, or by keeping their > > ChangeLogs in separate directories (which would mean each package > > will have its own directory, making load-path longer). > > Keep their ChangeLogs in the same place as their source (in the > "./elpa.git/packages/package-name/" directory). This has nothing to do > with the load-path. The load-path will point to "./lisp/from-elpa" > (which is where we copy the sources before compiling). Aren't you forgetting that ChangeLog files need to be part of the release tarball? Or do you mean we will have each package twice in a tarball, in 2 different directories?