From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Artur Malabarba Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Calling (package-initialize) sooner during initialization Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2015 19:48:18 +0100 Message-ID: References: <87383xk4ia.fsf@taylan.uni.cx> <87d231wm3y.fsf@ferrier.me.uk> <87twwdii0v.fsf@taylan.uni.cx> <874modwax4.fsf@ferrier.me.uk> Reply-To: bruce.connor.am@gmail.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1429382916 11999 80.91.229.3 (18 Apr 2015 18:48:36 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2015 18:48:36 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel To: Nic Ferrier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Apr 18 20:48:36 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1YjXn8-0007AC-BN for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 18 Apr 2015 20:48:34 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:46571 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YjXn7-0007l5-GD for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 18 Apr 2015 14:48:33 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45687) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YjXmu-0007kx-Cm for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 18 Apr 2015 14:48:21 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YjXmt-0006pl-Hm for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 18 Apr 2015 14:48:20 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-la0-x22f.google.com ([2a00:1450:4010:c03::22f]:35939) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YjXmt-0006ph-8x for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 18 Apr 2015 14:48:19 -0400 Original-Received: by lagv1 with SMTP id v1so101363249lag.3 for ; Sat, 18 Apr 2015 11:48:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:reply-to:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=CGyeObm3f8+cFjQ6yuhvObAApl0B7b6boMyfipxuGkU=; b=lPGyY9/pTj539lhUPzLtDseKICZW9w753NcvVtiPmYDB5k0triVv9FKvU9mE+0XN/s XrCE/tVqYGMxzbEtA0nt++20m3F9Y2nVGn7yLyYeXk+tM+Js+PKsTRmSCWMyYiNtnL1/ 1veQ6KqzDJL6jmkCl+XgDxK8DK+N+umMx+ILlHIWBIQ4Oj2YaTc3RRO3cazwsl1Muo27 HGkUbmhWopoWKQ+UMcRxlVDXmvmCKAyg1HsklVaJip3J0KRC+5qaAaSC2om+sGKIaXJF FNziky9RlxTHEnHhHMkeiH4+sX/BemaAc1KtL8w8eNU6UblZ6bBNqcaef8+3RU+9hZpw SmOg== X-Received: by 10.112.63.165 with SMTP id h5mr9161831lbs.16.1429382898455; Sat, 18 Apr 2015 11:48:18 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.25.150.1 with HTTP; Sat, 18 Apr 2015 11:48:18 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <874modwax4.fsf@ferrier.me.uk> X-Google-Sender-Auth: wFBOGWutmgdnBj88TasyOWYo7lI X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2a00:1450:4010:c03::22f X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:185631 Archived-At: 2015-04-18 19:25 GMT+01:00 Nic Ferrier : > I am kind of throwing up my arms in frustration at this. > > A way was picked a long time ago. Y'all now want to break that way in > the most breaking way possible instead of being incremental. All I want is to fix a problem a large number of less-knowledgeable users are experiencing. I don't think there is a way to do that without imposing at least a minor inconvenience on a (hopefully small) portion of the more experienced users. But I'd like to keep it just that at most (a small inconvenience), which is what the currently implemented solution was about. I thought that being forced to keep ";(package-initialize)" somewhere inside your init file would be small inconvenience at most, but some people seem to disagree, and that's how these more complicated discussions started showing up. > Are you sure that this will be least damaging to most people? Why are > you sure? Which specific proposal are you referring to? Taylan's suggestions seems to be very non-intrusive on the user, "seems" being an important word here. If you think it'll damage a lot of people, please let us know. AFAICT, people who need to do some special configuration before `package-initialize' would now have to move that stuff into another file (the suggested "pre-package-init.el") but that's about it. In exchange, it will make package configuration less headache inducing for inexperienced users, and even fixes the compatibility between package.el and custom.el (which the currently solution does not).