From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Thien-Thi Nguyen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Experimental features Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2007 14:40:24 +0200 Message-ID: <87r6o2j13b.fsf@ambire.localdomain> References: <467C3D83.8050308@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1182602442 13223 80.91.229.12 (23 Jun 2007 12:40:42 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2007 12:40:42 +0000 (UTC) Cc: "Lennart Borgman \(gmail\)" , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Jun 23 14:40:41 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1I24uu-00011H-PY for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 23 Jun 2007 14:40:41 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I24uu-0007Yt-8p for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 23 Jun 2007 08:40:40 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1I24uq-0007Yn-EV for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 23 Jun 2007 08:40:36 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1I24uo-0007YW-24 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 23 Jun 2007 08:40:35 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I24un-0007YS-Pa for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 23 Jun 2007 08:40:33 -0400 Original-Received: from smtp-out2.libero.it ([212.52.84.42]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1I24un-0005hu-7N for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 23 Jun 2007 08:40:33 -0400 Original-Received: from localhost (172.31.0.48) by smtp-out2.libero.it (7.3.120) id 4611FD9805A96B39 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 23 Jun 2007 14:40:32 +0200 X-Scanned: with antispam and antivirus automated system at libero.it Original-Received: from smtp-out3.libero.it ([172.31.0.39]) by localhost (asav-out7.libero.it [192.168.32.35]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id L8xDglfF9iXd for ; Sat, 23 Jun 2007 14:40:32 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from outrelay08.libero.it (192.168.32.103) by smtp-out3.libero.it (7.3.120) id 4611FDB605BA4F38 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 23 Jun 2007 14:40:32 +0200 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ah4FAPaxfEaXFSUJ/2dsb2JhbACBSg Original-Received: from ppp-9-37.21-151.libero.it (HELO ambire.localdomain) ([151.21.37.9]) by OutRelay-b08.libero.it with ESMTP; 23 Jun 2007 14:40:31 +0200 Original-Received: from ttn by ambire.localdomain with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1I24ue-0001FY-2V; Sat, 23 Jun 2007 14:40:24 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Stefan Monnier's message of "Sat\, 23 Jun 2007 00\:15\:06 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.1.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-kernel: Linux 2.4-2.6 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:73696 Archived-At: () Stefan Monnier () Sat, 23 Jun 2007 00:15:06 -0400 > I like the idea. Maybe the package manager discussed before > could come in to help here too? Oh, no, please! Let's not drag this into it, OK? it can't be helped. "experimental" is metadata (label, i.e., boolean property). package management is proper metadata management, among other (logistically-oriented) concerns. another thing about metadata: if useful, it can be applied to more things than the original domain. i.e., if code to be distributed w/ emacs can be labeled "experimental", why not other code outside of emacs? how does emacs' semantics for "experimental" interoperate w/ external semantics? etc. to be (more) concrete: at the moment, there is only convention: Commentary comment and w/in it Author, Maintainer, Version "tags". your proposal is not simply to suggest adding "Experimental: t" (or perhaps equivalently "Keywords: ... experimental ..."). it is to codify the handling of this information w/ user-visible consequences. when it is to be treated like so, it is no longer merely conventional. thus, proper metadata management is again indicated. thi