From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Philip Kaludercic Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: emacs-29 44ebd9cbd56 2/2: Eglot: explain how to update Eglot in manual (bug#62720) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2023 18:12:14 +0000 Message-ID: <87jzxvg9kx.fsf@posteo.net> References: <168263878553.23108.4718240877999827191@vcs2.savannah.gnu.org> <20230427233949.44D31C22A13@vcs2.savannah.gnu.org> <20f53b0a-d6ff-8ec0-2f8c-e0e22b2d49dc@gutov.dev> <83bkj8sjv4.fsf@gnu.org> <87cz3oaxsq.fsf@posteo.net> <8bbac559-396d-531e-e282-ed6b319cd99b@gutov.dev> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="33313"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Eli Zaretskii , emacs-devel@gnu.org, joaotavora@gmail.com To: Dmitry Gutov Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Apr 28 20:12:41 2023 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1psSaG-0008Tz-Vb for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 28 Apr 2023 20:12:41 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1psSZQ-0004MN-K7; Fri, 28 Apr 2023 14:11:48 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1psSZO-0004KT-D5 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Apr 2023 14:11:46 -0400 Original-Received: from mout01.posteo.de ([185.67.36.65]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1psSZM-0008J4-9X for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Apr 2023 14:11:46 -0400 Original-Received: from submission (posteo.de [185.67.36.169]) by mout01.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A398E240221 for ; Fri, 28 Apr 2023 20:11:42 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017; t=1682705502; bh=vjBL3BH+7W37TjaAvpyQasnqOw6K49PUyFVd8ITFBag=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Autocrypt:Date:From; b=ZyVfLMu6pwIMbLhfBoKEyzjU1cZGdw4z5G8ULht6mMS0VJZGp3HJeldxVgezG12gN HUT79SAip95vdV3Vhv6bVHrQGhGKDYhJ5M37pP8bUdBHBNvAWFkWWXAqwLK5eBNTO2 Pp1DWGHHTby9IPRjFOExmgUzD+bu+SSYzbx4XM5+2X0dh9mvw/2n+u4dRy3pd3UxZG Au2JrbKUP4cdL5G3AmXF1VbDd7oIeiexdo238wZj6KZ8LjGf+DyYtOk8mFfYzGdMnO ErtNf0M2G2J/LoZ6A+GxzHliAIJaPUTV/h1Du5QebraKmEtRhsgGb12qIwgmSOA7kH ZJ6UxuVEufxLw== Original-Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4Q7LKB0GKyz9rxQ; Fri, 28 Apr 2023 20:11:42 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <8bbac559-396d-531e-e282-ed6b319cd99b@gutov.dev> (Dmitry Gutov's message of "Fri, 28 Apr 2023 18:30:48 +0300") Autocrypt: addr=philipk@posteo.net; keydata= mDMEZBBQQhYJKwYBBAHaRw8BAQdAHJuofBrfqFh12uQu0Yi7mrl525F28eTmwUDflFNmdui0QlBo aWxpcCBLYWx1ZGVyY2ljIChnZW5lcmF0ZWQgYnkgYXV0b2NyeXB0LmVsKSA8cGhpbGlwa0Bwb3N0 ZW8ubmV0PoiWBBMWCAA+FiEEDg7HY17ghYlni8XN8xYDWXahwukFAmQQUEICGwMFCQHhM4AFCwkI BwIGFQoJCAsCBBYCAwECHgECF4AACgkQ8xYDWXahwulikAEA77hloUiSrXgFkUVJhlKBpLCHUjA0 mWZ9j9w5d08+jVwBAK6c4iGP7j+/PhbkxaEKa4V3MzIl7zJkcNNjHCXmvFcEuDgEZBBQQhIKKwYB BAGXVQEFAQEHQI5NLiLRjZy3OfSt1dhCmFyn+fN/QKELUYQetiaoe+MMAwEIB4h+BBgWCAAmFiEE Dg7HY17ghYlni8XN8xYDWXahwukFAmQQUEICGwwFCQHhM4AACgkQ8xYDWXahwukm+wEA8cml4JpK NeAu65rg+auKrPOP6TP/4YWRCTIvuYDm0joBALw98AMz7/qMHvSCeU/hw9PL6u6R2EScxtpKnWof z4oM Received-SPF: pass client-ip=185.67.36.65; envelope-from=philipk@posteo.net; helo=mout01.posteo.de X-Spam_score_int: -43 X-Spam_score: -4.4 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.4 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:305699 Archived-At: Dmitry Gutov writes: > On 28/04/2023 17:25, Philip Kaludercic wrote: >> Eli Zaretskii writes: >>=20 >>>> Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2023 02:52:56 +0300 >>>> From: Dmitry Gutov >>>> >>>> Hi! >>>> >>>> On 28/04/2023 02:39, Jo=C3=A3o T=C3=A1vora wrote: >>>>> * lisp/progmodes/eglot.el (eglot-update): New command. >>>> Should it be called eglot-upgrade now as well? >>> No, it should be removed. >> 1+ > > This doesn't sound very constructive at this point. It is difficult to be constructive here. I believe that the long-term complications/confusion of introducing this kind of a command instead of instructing users on Emacs 29 to update a package like Eglot manually is not worth it, while others do. These matters are difficult to quantify, so we cannot reach a consensus by pointing to some objective reality, and instead of have to fall back on personal impressions and experiences. I have a hunch that Jo=C3=A3o as the maintainer of Eglot is over-exposed to people who are interested in having the absolutely newest version so they can make use of the absolutely newest features, while most people I know, personally or online, that make use of Eglot barley bother to configure it at all (I consider that to be one of the major setting points for the package, btw). Comparing other configurations I have seen online, I actually think that what I have in my init.el is a lot: --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- (setup eglot (setopt eglot-autoshutdown t eglot-extend-to-xref t eldoc-echo-area-use-multiline-p nil eldoc-idle-delay 0.1) (:bind "C-c a" #'eglot-code-actions "C-c z" #'eglot-format "C-c r" #'eglot-rename) (:unbind [remap display-local-help])) --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- Just thinking about introducing a command that we right-now plan to deprecate by the next release is not something I look forward to. Even just promoting the concept of having a package-specific upgrade command is something I am a afraid of (it took for ages for third-party packages to stop adding pointless `foo-version' commands). And I might have missed something here, but none of this would tackle the "central" issue of use-package not installing the newest version of a package if the package is already built-in, but hasn't yet been installed before. As mentioned above: If we want to tell users to install packages using a custom command, they might as well use M-x list-packages and select the package from ELPA that way?