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: Reconsider defaults for use-package-vc-prefer-newest Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2024 20:57:15 +0300 Message-ID: <86cyl3cwhw.fsf@gnu.org> References: <86y13sdbbx.fsf@gnu.org> <86v7yvde74.fsf@gnu.org> 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="11933"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: =?utf-8?Q?Martin_Edstr=C3=B6m?= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Sep 16 19:58:31 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 1sqFzZ-0002uM-ON for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 16 Sep 2024 19:58:29 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sqFyW-0001bI-N1; Mon, 16 Sep 2024 13:57:24 -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 1sqFyR-0001ZY-O5 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 16 Sep 2024 13:57:21 -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 1sqFyQ-0005fN-By; Mon, 16 Sep 2024 13:57:18 -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=9UVTzHHhgdXvTLjJzaW/Wn2E8vaTrhF6A50ky6ndgfQ=; b=dT6EE62+km4CYBzZiWuq R56o+SrMx/hDbeMxpRbUnGz1TeVYBYdfLQ/OqsZP9ask8mBrEHO2T8k+1MOF3D3A1hT73jSszp7eI AKVdnF6JnRPYKkTOZwUkgh/CZdcg9PRvh/+ceS+ur6etfXBySq9DFLHpf3SDTGg/Kb3TexosTuH/z Qycz5sf1e2RUNecrz/aZwDR9/e70jS08dppJaWMWlHkQvyX/fj2XPwQ+XG7YeRhymBLEG4mL9TuJ5 Z8TWluQwH7PmVlBaGnxnB1guTUyiQhD4kButOk0YTTtAemWuQFBwgNj/JVVqN+o0CQOGoWaluptM5 wSLTkDe5w7eJ3A==; In-Reply-To: (meedstrom@runbox.eu) 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:323671 Archived-At: > From: "Martin Edström" > CC: "emacs-devel" > Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2024 18:15:45 +0200 (CEST) > > Okay, I'll accept that for the command package-vc-install, as I have not thought much about its use cases. > > I want to call attention to the old use-package :vc, shipped under the confusing name vc-use-package [1], that people could install on Emacs 29 and earlier. The Emacs 30 use-package :vc is a drop-in almost 1:1 replacement for this thing. It had the opposite default behavior from the default Emacs 30 is about to have. That change needs justification, not the other way around! > > [1] https://github.com/slotThe/vc-use-package That's a different package, so I don't see why we should necessarily follow its decisions. When users migrate to use-package :vc, they should expect some changes in the default behavior. > > > I should also point out that the catastrophe occurs not at release time, but years afterwards, when we're on Emacs 31, 32, 33... but devs still want to support Emacs 30, getting worse with time. So I do hope that it will be possible to change a setting like this with Emacs 30.2 or some other "bugfix" release. > > > > There's no reason to do this for user options, since customizing an > > option if the user doesn't like its default is easy. > > You cannot rely on users to configure this kind of thing for themselves, most of them would not know the reason why things broke. It is not a matter of "liking" the default, since breakage in one direction would be much more severe than is possible to encounter in the other direction (years out of date vs. slightly too new). Nowadays an Internet search will bring the answers very quickly and efficiently. And if that's not enough, there are enough user-level help forums where people could ask questions and get useful answers. IOW, "not a catastrophe". > It is absolutely Emacs' responsibility, at least as long as stability for users is desired. Isn't it the reason to favor conservative defaults? Avoiding breakage? I get this new default comes from a good place, intending stability, but it is a radical departure from what has been the norm established by Straight/Quelpa/el-get and their use-package integrations, and that will work against stability. We can only be responsible for stability when our own implementation and decisions are concerned. We cannot be expected to blindly follow someone else's decision in the name of "stability" for users who switch from other packages, this kind of expectation is completely unreasonable. > > I consider advancing Package-Version when significant changes are made > > a simple and uncontroversial thing to do for any package developer. I > > cannot imagine why someone who wants their package in good shape to > > regard this as some annoyance. > > This email discussion risks getting long, but let me know if you want me to describe why I do not find it simple. For now, I believe the relevant thing from Emacs' perspective is that there does exist developers who will not advance Package-Version, nevermind why. Well, simple or not, it is their act to get together. Not ours. Also, if we want to go an extra mile, I suggested a couple more measures that would delineate the issue to unsuspecting users.