From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Radon Rosborough Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Friendly discussion about (package-initialize) Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2017 21:39:44 -0700 Message-ID: References: <83inhwrqvh.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1502340078 18681 195.159.176.226 (10 Aug 2017 04:41:18 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2017 04:41:18 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Stefan Monnier , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Aug 10 06:41:14 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dffHK-0003hH-Mf for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 10 Aug 2017 06:41:02 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:51112 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dffHM-0003cz-D3 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 10 Aug 2017 00:41:04 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45400) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dffGn-0003ci-K9 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Aug 2017 00:40:30 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dffGm-00015u-LD for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Aug 2017 00:40:29 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-lf0-x232.google.com ([2a00:1450:4010:c07::232]:35451) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dffGk-00012c-U7; Thu, 10 Aug 2017 00:40:27 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-lf0-x232.google.com with SMTP id t128so36369249lff.2; Wed, 09 Aug 2017 21:40:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=PPDN86aEAFI7sn84e6fx9pyuOy76eNqV4WTNPChjBno=; b=aOdPpjVbAgwNSEQu4N06Dp0XWx0F6NiunmKShqL8K/Rv5OlS8SmSVTlHchfWLYNz4B 91btnki4IG0K00XaJfXwO/xhWrHR8iirPVEI+hwQ5KruW/VJPqsSxEe7IVGEcyWbFARx 5Efxuko00lt3nFjHjubopuqFygtdKnilD2QOLn9+tcVzkwXyHMv24SPYsy+n+9Ua+YqQ rLbIAbFfaLv94kFtyO08/55FV3WC7yenU1zGStJRfTbku0HpcyXAHBmXoJeev8G7rdRb 6hWiXq8nFBCIa/SDnDH6RHhOeMvuI8g++6X9pTxztmDAiR4Z28NXQqEcU8rmY//uUMBC QafQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=PPDN86aEAFI7sn84e6fx9pyuOy76eNqV4WTNPChjBno=; b=gItgCPPb5kj7cyo2e8ladm4NQl8EkUZoGpm69HJjY9Un3oAivB4sA6YJWduzSpbiXo ycSHvx6j+tGZuBu9Vs0grt7w/joi8nJGcKOoa608KYs90tUFTRtc2vI299LObeQx6P2y FRccWslQ3gBkostN6sH2lD9JEFTDB8oMmKVo5diYWwdmIGxCYBwxtNMVF84zpsKJ2jgV 532clDSc6TC9slbYVfjdizFS6E4lJcHoY4NRlRuBtRmZK4ga9wZhtCGNoe2FXgEH1DSv yvZ5jQpdFa+QFwE20FMCYsba95LFWPBPlIMyS+HRP2OWySvfWd1fpfZh+5zxUODVOSUl vLHw== X-Gm-Message-State: AHYfb5gXumsKGhnxeiYaNk+HcdQn6q7vxuCSR1Om3u+vYFIwaEX0Aibp UG4fK3roFPpeWplUxkOYs3NENHj44A/scJU= X-Received: by 10.46.71.198 with SMTP id u189mr3173167lja.161.1502340025426; Wed, 09 Aug 2017 21:40:25 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.46.64.86 with HTTP; Wed, 9 Aug 2017 21:39:44 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <83inhwrqvh.fsf@gnu.org> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 2a00:1450:4010:c07::232 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:217390 Archived-At: > Can someone explain, preferably in concise form, why are we having > this discussion about in which file to have the call to > package-initialize Gladly. Currently, Emacs has the opinion that you should call `package-initialize' in your init-file, and it enforces this opinion by automatically inserting such a call directly into your init-file at startup, or whenever you initialize the package management system. I view this behavior as wrong. Other people feel that it is the best solution to the problem of users putting package configuration in their init-file, which runs before `package-initialize' is called in startup.el. That is why we are having this discussion. > startup.el already calls that function (as IMO it should) I disagree, but won't speak further unless you think it will be relevant to the discussion. > where did we make the wrong turn with package.el. When Emacs started modifying the init-file specifically for package.el. Best, Radon