Re: Moving packages out of core to ELPA

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>]

> From: JD Smith <jdtsmith@gmail.com>
> Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2024 21:14:06 -0500
> Cc: emacs-devel <emacs-devel@gnu.org>
> 
> > Why is it so essential that such
> > packages be removed from core?  What practical advantage does that hold?
> 
> Many which I mentioned in my initial message.  The most salient:
> 
> - Reduces maintenance burdens, freeing time for packages that have more pressing issues. I have heard from emacs maintainers who have spent significant time trying to understand and fix bugs in IDLWAVE code that is likely unused (even by me).
> - Removes "tripping hazards" for users who inadvertently activate the mode for unrelated files and are confused (this is not hypothetical: I've had numerous reports).
> - Cuts down on "extra noise" in, e.g., the top level Info help.

These are very minor at best.  Some of them could be made even less
significant by simple measures like removing the associations from
auto-mode-alist.  Don't worry about those; if there are still users of
the package, leaving it in core and favoring those users completely
outweighs the above disadvantages.

> > A Lisp file is considered part of Emacs, whether it be in core or in
> > ELPA.  They are expected to meet like standards, and bugs (in the
> > absence of a maintainer) are the responsibility of the same Emacs
> > developers who respond to bugs that concern Emacs in general, i.e., like
> > developers.  
> 
> Is this really so, in practice?  I have packages in ELPA which are effectively untouched except by me, other than on first ingestion.  And they draw updates from a repo I maintain myself.  Maybe I've misconstrued the situation, but my understanding has been that core packages receive far more attention from maintainers.  And rightly so, IMO: everyone has them installed, after all.  

Please don't be bothered by the maintenance burden of dormant
packages: it is a non-issue.

> >>   It deserves support in Emacs.  Just not, IMO, in core.
> > 
> > Why not?  Why does _anything_, to speak nothing of a package already in
> > core, not "deserve" support in core, while deserving support in ELPA?
> 
> Because in ELPA, users must proactively opt-in to the use of the package.  For such users — those who have actively sought it out — in stark contrast to the vast majority of Emacs users, the benefits dramatically outweigh the costs.

The costs are minuscule, so it isn't worth considering them in such
cases.