erc has lost its version number? (was: [elpa] ZNC package)

erc has lost its version number? (was: [elpa] ZNC package)

[Artur Malabarba]

On the Emacs 24.4 distribution I have installed here, the erc library
has `;;; Version: 5.3' on the header, but on the latest emacs master
branch the erc library has no version header.

Anyone know why that is? Is that a commit on emacs-24.4 that wasn't
merged to master? Or was erc's version number specifically removed?

Re: erc has lost its version number? (was: [elpa] ZNC package)

[Kelvin White]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 558 bytes --]

> Artur Malabarba wrote:
> On the Emacs 24.4 distribution I have installed here, the erc library
> has `;;; Version: 5.3' on the header, but on the latest emacs master
> branch the erc library has no version header.

> Anyone know why that is? Is that a commit on emacs-24.4 that wasn't
> merged to master? Or was erc's version number specifically removed?

ERC Version has been changed to follow emacs versioning.
It is part of emacs and does not need separate versioning.
There are indeed some changes in emacs-24 branch that
need to be merged into master

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 702 bytes --]

Re: erc has lost its version number? (was: [elpa] ZNC package)

[Artur Malabarba]

> ERC Version has been changed to follow emacs versioning.
> It is part of emacs and does not need separate versioning.
> There are indeed some changes in emacs-24 branch that
> need to be merged into master

It needs a version number in order to be considered a package by
`package.el'. There is a number of packages on the repositories which
depend on `erc-5.3', and these currently can't be installed on emacs
master because the dependency can't be met.

We need to either ask these packages to rely on Emacs version instead
of erc version, or come up with a way to indicate that a package
should inherit emacs' version number, or go back to specifying erc's
version.

Re: erc has lost its version number? (was: [elpa] ZNC package)

[Kelvin White]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 817 bytes --]

> Artur Malabarba <bruce.connor.am@gmail.com> wrote:
> It needs a version number in order to be considered a package by
> `package.el'. There is a number of packages on the repositories which
> depend on `erc-5.3', and these currently can't be installed on emacs
> master because the dependency can't be met.

Is it as simple as a header with the version number, or does `erc-version'
need to respond with 5.3?

> We need to either ask these packages to rely on Emacs version instead
> of erc version, or come up with a way to indicate that a package
> should inherit emacs' version number, or go back to specifying erc's
> version.

I think we should definitely ask these packages to not rely on erc-version
5.3, but we can also try and keep the obsolete version number around until
it doesn't break other packages.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2102 bytes --]

Re: erc has lost its version number? (was: [elpa] ZNC package)

[Artur Malabarba]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 905 bytes --]

> Is it as simple as a header with the version number, or does `erc-version'
> need to respond with 5.3?

Yes, a header with the version number is enough. `erc-version' is
irrelevant to package.el.

> > We need to either ask these packages to rely on Emacs version instead
> > of erc version, or come up with a way to indicate that a package
> > should inherit emacs' version number, or go back to specifying erc's
> > version.
>
> I think we should definitely ask these packages to not rely on
erc-version 5.3, but we can also try and keep the obsolete version number
around until it doesn't break other packages.

Ok, let's bring back the number for now. I'll try to get in touch with the
authors.

I think it would be a useful feature for built-in packages to be able to
specify "follow emacs version". This could be as simple as specifying
"emacs" on the Version header (instead of a version number).

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1096 bytes --]

Re: erc has lost its version number? (was: [elpa] ZNC package)

[Kelvin White]

Artur Malabarba <bruce.connor.am@gmail.com> wrote:

> Ok, let's bring back the number for now. I'll try to get in touch with the
> authors.

Done

> I think it would be a useful feature for built-in packages to be able to
> specify "follow emacs version". This could be as simple as specifying
> "emacs" on the Version header (instead of a version number).

That would be useful, indeed.

Re: erc has lost its version number?

[Tom Tromey]

Artur> I think it would be a useful feature for built-in packages to be able
Artur> to specify "follow emacs version". This could be as simple as
Artur> specifying "emacs" on the Version header (instead of a version
Artur> number). 

If you then want to provide a separate upgrade for the package, you'll
have to come up with some new version number for it that doesn't
conflict.

I think it's simpler to just give packages their own versions, though
your suggestion seems ok if the above problem is solved sanely.

Tom

Re: erc has lost its version number?

[Artur Malabarba]

2015-02-17 17:56 GMT-02:00 Tom Tromey <tom@tromey.com>:
> Artur> I think it would be a useful feature for built-in packages to be able
> Artur> to specify "follow emacs version". This could be as simple as
> Artur> specifying "emacs" on the Version header (instead of a version
> Artur> number).
>
> If you then want to provide a separate upgrade for the package, you'll
> have to come up with some new version number for it that doesn't
> conflict.

Yes, this option would be a convenience for packages that won't be
available anywhere else. Packages that also offer separate upgrades
are better off maintaining their own version numbers.