Re: Easy configuration of a site-lisp directory

[dick <dick.r.chiang@gmail.com>]

> Never heard of Elpaso before. What is the advantage compared to straight?

It embraces package.el.  Straight would prefer its users eliminate all
package.el configuration.  As I am a contemptuous (and contemptible) being,
I'll take this opportunity to badmouth straight.  Its answer to GNU ELPA being
"stupidly complex" was hosting a Heroku mirror to "bypass terrible package
management decisions" and to avoid having to understand the elpa-admin
code. [1] One particularly unsightly side effect of this is 50 lines of gnarly
elisp to get around org-mode's needing a preliminary call to `make`.

It's also impossible to take seriously a README that is 23,000 words, but what
do I know?  My reading of r/emacs suggests roughly half the forum's enthusiasts
use straight, not to mention all the zoomer doomers.

> a centralized reviewed source is also at least some security safety net.

Statements like this only encourage the invidious-minded among us to "check
your privilege."  It's obvious to everyone that baseline measures like
package-signing or secure http only ensure the trojan horse you're getting is
authentically the trojan horse that my blackhat alias wrote.  The ELPAs rely
on our good faith and the limited financial upside of exploiting a userbase of
our modest size (and probably modest means -- emacsers use free software not
only for philosophical reasons!).

[1] https://github.com/raxod502/straight.el/issues/762#issuecomment-841859211