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: Moving packages out of core to ELPA Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2024 15:08:32 +0200 Message-ID: <865xylsywf.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87h6i6y2ch.fsf@yahoo.com> <874je6xwxc.fsf@yahoo.com> <7B07650E-50E8-407D-991C-53CA470D243F@gmail.com> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="22997"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: luangruo@yahoo.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: JD Smith Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Feb 18 14:08:48 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 1rbguW-0005kD-Fb for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 18 Feb 2024 14:08:48 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rbguL-0001Oa-2G; Sun, 18 Feb 2024 08:08:37 -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 1rbguJ-0001NJ-DA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 18 Feb 2024 08:08:35 -0500 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 1rbguJ-0006CZ-4P; Sun, 18 Feb 2024 08:08:35 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=sR/EzXHeynlfYSwNffllQk/3mdycn2MulWHRAmTTtoc=; b=XgM9OkG4fXmh iTfCyUWsQf7f0snKsdZTiL+zzxr3KHkTQcreOGYx8y6LkMLx6ViG6Hvowph42h3LxcBUkzPAqHJpR SJAu8qGBPT3x4+0jYKJ6S1VsolI2UNi8kt27MtIa6CK8hgrkvOXVLwnUQizzpXu2Wgbcln2kLiy/v COH5vu8KKMe75EQIkh04agNzIWxfcDNlEJN8cjvT+edhofacOtni+Xb0/oeMrSH8KZ/RxVNdvqgZO BkuHn9vlsG5gEo0NnVrMtMcVRcutJuSSmrFm3EkGLlvzyC1nvkQ4l0lhYFpTxRfRwuA/taRNkxphM 34Pi97z8XTVPlAkHCfZ5yw==; In-Reply-To: <7B07650E-50E8-407D-991C-53CA470D243F@gmail.com> (message from JD Smith on Sun, 18 Feb 2024 07:39:02 -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:316308 Archived-At: > From: JD Smith > Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2024 07:39:02 -0500 > Cc: emacs-devel > > I am of course not myself an emacs maintainer, but I would be interested to hear whether everyone who is agrees that maintenance costs are "strictly zero" for seldom-used code. I already said that I agreed. (And "seldom-used" is not the relevant aspect; the relevant aspect is whether the package is still being actively developed by someone who submits changes to us.)