Re: [ELPA] New package: nspawn-tramp

[Michael Albinus <michael.albinus@gmx.de>]

Brian Cully <bjc@spork.org> writes:

Hi Brian,

> On 2/19/22 10:05, Stefan Monnier wrote:
>> I'd be happy to add it to GNU ELPA, but I have a few questions/comments
>> some of which may affect this decision, so I haven't done it yet:
>> - It's usually spelled "Tramp" rather than "TRAMP", AFAIK.
>
> 	The info page for it has it spelled as "TRAMP", although the
> 	link to it from the list in the top-level (from "M-x info")
> 	has it as "Tramp". I assume the former is correct given its
> 	specificity.

In tramp.texi, we use @value{tramp}. This variable is declared in
trampver.texi as

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
@set tramp @sc{Tramp}
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

Therefore, it appears in info pages as "TRAMP". In Elisp docstrings and
comments, we use "Tramp". It looks a little bit inconsistent, but it is
... history. This texinfo variable was declared long before I've ever
heard about Tramp.

>> - Any reason why you want to have it as a separate package rather than
>>    add it to Tramp?
>
> 	TRAMP provides a plugin capability, which is being used by
> 	other packages, and it's already a behemoth. I see no need to
> 	include this directly within TRAMP itself, as its needs are
> 	perfectly addressed without.

I understand your ressentiments. OTOH, living outside the Tramp source
tree let you miss changes. For example, Tramp meanwhile doesn't hardcode
"/bin/sh" any longer, but uses tramp-default-remote-shell instead. Not a
big deal for now, but these little adaptions make a Tramp package more
consistent, because you would get such a change for free if your package
is bundled with Tramp directly.

Best regards, Michael.