From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: phillip.lord@newcastle.ac.uk (Phillip Lord) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: package and testing rant (was Re: package.el, auto-installation, and auto-removal) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2014 11:04:24 +0000 Message-ID: <8761eixcuf.fsf@newcastle.ac.uk> References: <87a943umku.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87ppcvm7fj.fsf@newcastle.ac.uk> <87vbmndk46.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87wq72ls2h.fsf@ferrier.me.uk> <87k332lnn3.fsf_-_@ferrier.me.uk> <878ujhtx89.fsf@Rainer.invalid> <8761eki9ym.fsf@ferrier.me.uk> <87sihogkt0.fsf@ferrier.me.uk> <87sihncqxy.fsf@newcastle.ac.uk> <87r3x7f8x7.fsf@ferrier.me.uk> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1415963099 1690 80.91.229.3 (14 Nov 2014 11:04:59 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2014 11:04:59 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Achim Gratz , Stefan Monnier , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Nic Ferrier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Nov 14 12:04:52 2014 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 1XpEgM-0006U8-SO for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 14 Nov 2014 12:04:51 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:35835 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XpEgM-0000OB-75 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 14 Nov 2014 06:04:50 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:52668) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XpEg6-0000Nz-9s for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 14 Nov 2014 06:04:38 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XpEg1-0000tp-S4 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 14 Nov 2014 06:04:34 -0500 Original-Received: from cheviot22.ncl.ac.uk ([128.240.234.22]:37703) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XpEg1-0000tM-Lk for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 14 Nov 2014 06:04:29 -0500 Original-Received: from smtpauth-vm.ncl.ac.uk ([10.8.233.129] helo=smtpauth.ncl.ac.uk) by cheviot22.ncl.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1XpEfx-0003et-FY; Fri, 14 Nov 2014 11:04:25 +0000 Original-Received: from jangai.ncl.ac.uk ([10.66.67.223] helo=localhost) by smtpauth.ncl.ac.uk with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1XpEfw-0002Mc-IH; Fri, 14 Nov 2014 11:04:24 +0000 In-Reply-To: <87r3x7f8x7.fsf@ferrier.me.uk> (Nic Ferrier's message of "Thu, 13 Nov 2014 14:54:12 +0000") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 128.240.234.22 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:177063 Archived-At: Nic Ferrier writes: > phillip.lord@newcastle.ac.uk (Phillip Lord) writes: > >> Nic Ferrier writes: >>> The centralization isn't really a problem right now you think. But I bet >>> it is. You're making people work inside a source tree that doesn't >>> belong to them and you're constraining the technical content they put >>> there. >>> >>> You're also inviting people to break the Makefile because they want >>> their own build. >>> >>> You're also inviting people to check in non-working code. >>> >>> You might say "these things have not happened yet". But that's because >>> there are very few ELPA authors so far. Maybe one of the reasons there >>> are so few ELPA authors is that it's weird. >> >> >> There is some truth in this. I feel rather more nervous commting into >> ELPA because it contains so many pieces of work from others. With my own >> repo's, that's fine. If I screw things up, then it's my problem. > > Kinda implies there isn't any truth in the rest of it :-( But only kinda implies, not actually implies. For the record, I only sort of agree with you. First, I think you are overplaying things somewhat. I can see the issues that you are talking about, but I am not certain how common they are. If it's just org-mode and maybe semantic that a complicated build, then perhaps special case treatment is the best way forward. Second, I do not think that the problem is that elpa.git is a source archive, or that the artifacts are build away from the developer. It is a worry that it may not be so easy to reproduce. So, for example, with MELPA, I can pull down the whole thing (small at 17Mb, because it only contains recipies). Then make recipies/pabbrev builds my package. The point is that the build is *replicable* from the source; I can do it locally, even though normally, I do not. Finally, I think your complaints about elpa.git are also reasonable; I would prefer to be using my own repo for my packages. Getting everything set up on an ELPA branch has not been trivial (and is still not entirely working for reasons I cannot figure). However, I can appreciate Stefan's position. He has already made some changes to my packages and improved them. For me, the cost of raising my own activation energy in contributing to ELPA is probably worth the benefit of lowering his. Phil