From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Jonas Bernoulli Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#48592: [PATCH 0/2] Support plural forms of Author and Maintainer library headers Date: Mon, 24 May 2021 10:58:54 +0200 Message-ID: <87o8d0mrsh.fsf@bernoul.li> References: <20210522202519.32549-1-jonas@bernoul.li> <83fsyej6bc.fsf@gnu.org> <871r9xon5v.fsf@bernoul.li> <837djpkd8k.fsf@gnu.org> <87wnrpaery.fsf@gnus.org> <871r9xpt5w.fsf@gmx.de> <87v979mhv7.fsf@bernoul.li> <87tumtnvay.fsf@gmx.de> <87sg2dm9tp.fsf@bernoul.li> <87pmxgobne.fsf@gmx.de> 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="18697"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Lars Ingebrigtsen , 48592@debbugs.gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii , Michael Albinus Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon May 24 10:59:40 2021 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 1ll6R2-0004iD-93 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 24 May 2021 10:59:40 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:40262 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ll6R0-0002xQ-Ln for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 24 May 2021 04:59:38 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:54978) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ll6QQ-0002vn-B5 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 24 May 2021 04:59:02 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:59079) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ll6QQ-0005eK-2E for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 24 May 2021 04:59:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ll6QQ-0002Cq-0k for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 24 May 2021 04:59:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Jonas Bernoulli Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 24 May 2021 08:59:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 48592 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch Original-Received: via spool by 48592-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B48592.16218467408472 (code B ref 48592); Mon, 24 May 2021 08:59:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 48592) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 May 2021 08:59:00 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:42392 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ll6QN-0002Ca-PU for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 24 May 2021 04:58:59 -0400 Original-Received: from mail.hostpark.net ([212.243.197.30]:45804) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ll6QM-0002CP-3L for 48592@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 24 May 2021 04:58:59 -0400 Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.hostpark.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88915165C8; Mon, 24 May 2021 10:58:56 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=bernoul.li; h= content-transfer-encoding:content-type:content-type:mime-version :message-id:date:date:references:in-reply-to:subject:subject :from:from:received:received; s=sel2011a; t=1621846734; bh=aDuet aEJyczEITWAgqSUQa4WvmcUEr1oviNR7Kh6oMQ=; b=ZIEVYWtZNaOtJRJhXr0G6 hpDr6RKSp4rZq6dY/OqOuw9K9rUUzIPQdcFpAAk/C8uG4KZQiDwoos1Fv60XqC0Q cBvuICkACG8g2aui03Yv9Ut+LwzvAqOwPllqQ0zMipBV2rdBFMjZs7q4zDr6NGFB wfu/mF8DD7Ql4evytbnXps= X-Virus-Scanned: by Hostpark/NetZone Mailprotection at hostpark.net Original-Received: from mail.hostpark.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail0.hostpark.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10224) with ESMTP id w6236mG0vGIq; Mon, 24 May 2021 10:58:54 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail.hostpark.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 56F7D165C3; Mon, 24 May 2021 10:58:54 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: 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" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:207119 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> [Add lm-maintainers and make lm-maintainer obsolete.] > Fine by me as well, but: > . I see no reason to deprecate lm-maintainer: there's nothing wrong > with wanting to obtain the first name in the list; > > . Please describe in the doc string of lm-maintainer what it does when > there's more than one. The reason why I want to deprecate lm-maintainer is that this informs users of that function that some packages may have more than one maintainer and that it is now possible and (I dare say) encouraged to acknowledge them all. Sure adding a note to lm-maintainer technically accomplishes the same, but once one has started using lm-maintainer, then one doesn't periodically go back to see whether a new notes have been added to its doc-string. But something like this would do the trick of guiding the attention towards the extended functionality and its updated documentation: In package-build--desc-from-library: lib/package-build/package-build.el:516:26: Warning: =E2=80=98lm-maintaine= r=E2=80=99 is an obsolete function (as of 28.1); use =E2=80=98lm-maintainers=E2=80=99 = instead. Yes, there is nothing wrong with ignoring all but the first maintainer (except of course, not properly attributing the contributions of the others as they choose to present it), but it seems to me that having to: - (lm-maintainer) + (car (lm-maintainers)) is perfectly acceptable in cases where only "the" maintainer can be mentioned because there is not enough room to display the names of all maintainers. (So it is still a good idea to list the primus inter pares maintainer first.) Cheers, Jonas