From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?UTF-8?Q?Jo=C3=A3o_?= =?UTF-8?Q?T=C3=A1vora?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#62720: 29.0.60; Not easy at all to upgrade :core packages like Eglot Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2023 11:24:41 +0100 Message-ID: <87mt391lzq.fsf@gmail.com> References: <87a5zj2vfo.fsf@gmail.com> <83mt3b4yfc.fsf@gnu.org> <87edonlsxi.fsf@posteo.net> <83jzyf4vzb.fsf@gnu.org> <871qknllkj.fsf@posteo.net> <83fs934pjf.fsf@gnu.org> <87wn2fk47y.fsf@posteo.net> <83sfd2g2ek.fsf@gnu.org> <875y9yfxrr.fsf@gmail.com> <87y1muefks.fsf@gmail.com> <834jpifizy.fsf@gnu.org> <83y1mue1qi.fsf@gnu.org> <83sfd2e01f.fsf@gnu.org> <835y9xecvp.fsf@gnu.org> 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="37870"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Cc: 62720@debbugs.gnu.org, rpluim@gmail.com, philipk@posteo.net, dmitry@gutov.dev, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, larsi@gnus.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Apr 15 12:23:19 2023 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@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 1pnd3v-0009gR-4W for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 15 Apr 2023 12:23:19 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pnd3h-0000Id-Gd; Sat, 15 Apr 2023 06:23:05 -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 1pnd3f-0000IP-H6 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Apr 2023 06:23:03 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pnd3e-0006i7-OB for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Apr 2023 06:23:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1pnd3e-0008Rh-Dd for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Apr 2023 06:23:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: =?UTF-8?Q?Jo=C3=A3o_?= =?UTF-8?Q?T=C3=A1vora?= Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2023 10:23:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 62720 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 62720-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B62720.168155416332418 (code B ref 62720); Sat, 15 Apr 2023 10:23:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 62720) by debbugs.gnu.org; 15 Apr 2023 10:22:43 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48295 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1pnd3K-0008Qn-NL for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 15 Apr 2023 06:22:43 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-wm1-f45.google.com ([209.85.128.45]:40644) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1pnd3J-0008QY-0g for 62720@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 15 Apr 2023 06:22:41 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-wm1-f45.google.com with SMTP id o6-20020a05600c4fc600b003ef6e6754c5so9268484wmq.5 for <62720@debbugs.gnu.org>; Sat, 15 Apr 2023 03:22:40 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20221208; t=1681554155; x=1684146155; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:user-agent:message-id:date :references:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=8QPowm17a8Kb0Cs5RvA6Q1PR1tkvGifphJpjWggG0Sc=; b=nGRajaq4qdmBwkueiiwAlg524wuOC+ZjeOA3HEx0hHR+ASprr7mysG3gKC72esxZC5 wDrO2hv5z+OU3e819LJAlKJThWeAAfP4+JFDwBcPIA/xjVnjx0Cl70+8FSZj0eXOYJ0b L7F6FWSwGpazRvCBu0qbUXA4HAUDgDS/be9sIj5Y3nXYfox25zNETBGjqFY2jSpnkNC9 qcEYLJTaL5eMqrvBoTt1NCyx8cVOtToO4FxQ4VTsvl30Kpz7HBdqqbFbDJD+JWqAZTh2 GTJxYhWFjkZCC/R9/ixmDk849U0JorTrP5qdwCahdqik51fCcmeOu9o489u4CNT7TjzY A3xg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1681554155; x=1684146155; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:user-agent:message-id:date :references:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from :to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=8QPowm17a8Kb0Cs5RvA6Q1PR1tkvGifphJpjWggG0Sc=; b=MtlejJAX3jwV37+vec0sjSVb72Sp4kj0d2QHKqViiv55BlrrCZq4cD/6ramZHhV5bq H3WNoeuFwJd5l3FYvJHJWalcJVZqlMltDOEbYeUqd8E3+mUzTmdxSXSSjxnOGiwKf1Q4 Mkxwx1B+RWPw21HURnAMSO47dYl8+3LlRpmcyjQacwJWbOULATrF9K4dlne11LZXMBu/ GIsPKSKVO0rXCFBdaJmSW/3zSdBrWHCrEEHOteSMFrJ/p5UozqHeKoiUoFECKABTwILK utwG37+wQVWFPjFe8lmiffIzHNLfmjxxFFnXxH7225qMjoc/DMVTRTYceltdopeF6Omd CeeA== X-Gm-Message-State: AAQBX9c/4zpAZyLl/5p856wwZ5VYvscJ+XB6cLwV3L9NaJqC/JsuPDm4 ddHFawUwLoQQ983ml/lMQl8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AKy350aKecNarF0B7GosbPH6N1Q8TOMDqrLtcbR2JYTk3IKKcJFxfiS6m61waDrFsNxEQRA4YJV/eQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:2251:b0:3ed:316d:668d with SMTP id a17-20020a05600c225100b003ed316d668dmr6320659wmm.5.1681554155072; Sat, 15 Apr 2023 03:22:35 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from krug ([87.196.73.56]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j4-20020a5d5644000000b002f02df4c7a3sm5469312wrw.30.2023.04.15.03.22.33 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sat, 15 Apr 2023 03:22:34 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <835y9xecvp.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Sat, 15 Apr 2023 12:03:06 +0300") X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:260016 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> > So you don't recommend that users who want a stable Eglot upgrade to >> > 1.14? >> Depends on how "stable" they want it and how badly they want new >> features. > You are dodging the question, which is unfortunate.=20=20 I'm not. I don't have an answer. I can't have one. It depends on the user's wishes. Case 1: You use Emacs in a debian server VM you're setting up, perhaps in a remote location, perhaps shared with other users. Just 'sudo apt install emacs clangd'. No .emacs file at all and you can go edit little C programs conveniently and quickly. Then I recommend Eglot 1.12.29 bundled with emacs 29. Case 2: For your "daily driver" home system, I recommend `M-x package-install RET eglot' (at least I used to, that is ) since that will bring you the latest nice features tested to a good degree, but not as well tested as 1.12.29. > important question, much more general and important than this > tempest-in-a-teapot issue we are discussing here.=20=20 If I were to use your rhetoric, I would say you are "shifting" the question. I've never had real problems about this. But if you want to "revisit this question seriously", I'll be there, of course. > We will need to revisit this question seriously if we ever succeed in > removing 'core' ... > Based on your answer, it sounds like Eglot users are on their own in > this aspect: they have no real guidance from you which version is > currently considered "stable". They have the NEWS file, the bug tracker database, and my best efforts. I told you how I make releases. I want them to be stable, but there is no official pretest. "Guidance"? Are the two cases above I gave guidance? Just present some actual case and I'll give you my recommendation. Else it's like coming to a doctor and asking about taking a drug: the doctor probably going to ask you questions. >> But if a colleague goes to their workstation and shows them >> M-x package-install RET very-fancy-nice-thing or sends them a >> super-fancy init.el they will take it no problem, and buy you >> coffee and rave about it. I can't be the only one who has >> experienced this :-) > > I have no doubt there are such cases. But I very much doubt they are > the majority.=20=20 I don't, whole '.emacs' get shared like crazy. That's the number one method of "getting a configuration". People see other's Emacs in screenshots or over the shoulder and ask to see their init file. Not just Emacs of course, any util. Then they copy over bits they think are cool/useful. What you think they won't copy "use-package" forms?? People don't read NEWS and they don't read the manual. Most Emacs users I knew don't even know NEWS exists, what with that strange all caps name. They probably think it's some major mode for journalists. > To reiterate: I think each release of Emacs should ship with the > latest stable version of each core package. If this is the case, the > need to upgrade core packages via package.el is not very important for > the majority of our users who prefer to use a stable Emacs. Thus, the > arguments you present emphasize the needs of the minority, and > therefore I don't consider them strong enough to invalidate the > compromise solution to which we are converging. Sorry, but IMO you come up with very complicated logic and premises about stability just to arrive at where you want to arrive. A simple, readily verifiable fact remains. M-x package-install RET eglot in Emacs 29 will bring you a older version than in Emacs 28. If not today, tomorrow, eventually it will. And that's just bad in my opinion. And it will become worse. If, in your opinion, this is somehow a good or indifferent thing, we can stop the whole discussion right here. Again: if you think it's a _good thing_ that, in Emacs 29 (use-package eglot :ensure t)=20 or (package-install 'eglot) or=20 M-x package-install RET eglot produces an older version of Eglot than the very same form in Emacs 26, 27 and 28, please do say so ASAP. I was under the impression that you didn't prefer that, but I'm not sure anymore after reading your complex last paragraph. >> I think it's imperative to _allow_ -- as you say -- and also and >> to _make easy_. > > "C-u M-x package-install" is easy enough. > >> More importantly, and to the point, to _make it as easy as it was in >> Emacs 26, 27 and 28_. > > That's an impractical request, one that most probably prefers Eglot > users (and only part of them at that) to those of other core packages. > We must think about all the users, not just users of Eglot. The price > of adaptation to the fact that Eglot is now a core package, while it > is not nil, is not high. So once again, this solution is IMO a > reasonable compromise, given the constraints. It's _not_ impractical. There doesn't have to be a "compromise solution" at all. There _can_ be a win-win solution (presuming I even understand what counts as a win to you in this issue). I just gave Philip a 7 line patch, my fourth in this discussion, that does exactly I think answers all of your objections regarding risk/stability. Much simpler than any patch so far by _any_ measure. Lines of code, cyclomatic complexity, number of user options, NEWS changes. Will you look at it? Jo=C3=A3o