Re: emacs-29 44ebd9cbd56 2/2: Eglot: explain how to update Eglot in manual (bug#62720)

["João Távora" <joaotavora@gmail.com>]

On Thu, May 4, 2023 at 1:57 AM Dmitry <dmitry@gutov.dev> wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 4, 2023, at 3:50 AM, João Távora wrote:
>
> Anyway, I would rather not have people that have already gotten 1.15 and
> using it (not many) seeing eglot-update change to eglot-upgrade.
> By 1.20 noone will remember, but I think we should at least add a
> compatibility alias (eglot-upgrade being the advertised one, and keep
> eglot-update for 3/4 versions).
>
> That would make the situation even more of a mess, wouldn't it? Unless you intend to drop the alias after a couple of Eglot's releases. But that wouldn't be possible because both names would have appeared in Emacs 29.

Why messy?  "update" and "upgrade" and used interchangeably
anyway in speech/writing. But if it's "less messy" to revert eglot-update
then no problem.

> > Up to you either way.
>
> Please add the compatibility alias, if you can.
>
> > >> Two more things:
> > >>
> > >> - Commit 44ebd9cbd56 also removed the call to (eldoc) from the end of
> > >> eglot-completion-at-point which has been there for a few years. Was that
> > >> intentional? Didn't look like it.
> > > Not intentional no.  Well, at least not for that commit.
> > > Not pretty, but I wouldn't worry about it.
> >
> > So it's not a breakage? Okay then.
>
> No, it was actually intended (not for that commit of course).
>
> As long as it was intended for Emacs 29.

There's no harm in having it in Emacs 29 (that's where
I tested it).