Re: Installing binaries with package.el

[Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com>]

On Thu, 09 Feb 2017 08:10:58 -0500 Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> wrote: 

>> Do you think OS distributions will pick up the module distribution
>> piece like they did with Python, Perl, etc.?

SM> Not sure what you mean.  Debian does already provide various ELPA
SM> packages, so I guess the answer is yes, but I don't think this will be
SM> of much help to the above problems (it just lets the user choose whether
SM> to install a package via ELP or via dpkg, and only for those packages
SM> which Debian has packaged as a dpkg).  IOW, they do a parallel job,
SM> which doesn't really help us (not to imply that it hurts, tho).

If Debian will keep track of package dependencies, and we are not so
worried about other platforms (expecting them to match Debian's
approach), and we're satisfied that their approach resolves the issues
I've brought up (OS package dependencies and dynload module/general
binary distribution), then it's a lot less important to have
dependencies on OS packages in ELPA packages or to provide any binaries
(the two ELPA features I've proposed so far).

If we agree on that, then ELPA packages of dynload modules only have to
support local compilation for developers.

Ted