Re: Moving packages out of core to ELPA

[Po Lu <luangruo@yahoo.com>]

JD Smith <jdtsmith@gmail.com> writes:

> OK, then I suppose staging in lisp/obsolete/ makes sense.  I do worry
> about the connotations of obsolete meaning "stop using", "does not
> work at all" or "soon to vanish".

If its users have truly gone the way of the dodo, I see no reason this
should be a problem.  It won't be necessary to move it to ELPA either.

> In fact IDLWAVE does still work and is useful for a small set of
> users, it just does more harm than good in core, IMO.

Packages whose existence comes at the detriment of their host (Emacs) do
not develop this trait over time.  Either they suffer from deficiencies
that prevent the host from functioning, which become evident as soon as
they are merged, or their existence is an asset of the host's, however
minor it may be.

> One idea would be to create another category for packages "on their
> way out" of core.  I'm sure there's a better name, but lisp/noncore
> comes to mind.  The intended difference being that obsolete packages
> will likely disappear entirely from the project, whereas "noncore"
> packages will be migrated to ELPA, where users can find them once they
> have left core for good.

If it's not obsolete, it should remain in core, period.