Pedro Andres Aranda Gutierrez <paaguti@gmail.com> writes:
> Message-ID: <86r0dksk1x.fsf@gnu.org>
>
>>> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
>>>
>>> > If there are packages on ELPA which we consider to be a must for users
>>> > (I don't think there are, but maybe I'm forgetting something), lets
>>> > add them to core instead.
>>>
>>> If Emacs considers in-buffer completion an important feature, then I'd
>>> say corfu and cape are must. vertico and marginalia are also must in my
>>> book since they offer a better experience with vertical minibuffer
>>> completion.
>
>> If people want them, and their developers agree, we can add them.
>
> <irony>At this point, why not company, which BTW works nicely both on
> windows and -nw Emacs?</irony>
I unironically think that this might be a better choice.
Hmm... nice to hear... thanks :-)
> <seriously>For every package you think of integrating, there will be a lot
> of people how use a different package for the functionality, so this spells
> exchanges without end here and a lot of users frustrated in the world
> outside the list </seriously>
Bundling a package with Emacs is not the same as enabling it by default.
+1
I guess the exception are major modes, where it makes sense to have
these added to auto-mode-alist, but otherwise something like Company
shouldn't be enabled by default.
Couldn't agree more...
>>> And while we're at it: There are sometimes requests for adding AUCTeX to
>>> core. Do you have an opinion about that?
>>
>>I don't mind. But let's hear what others think.
>
> Well, AUCTeX was so feature-bloated that made me start using vanilla Emacs
> and writing the things I really needed myself. So grateful it existed,
> because it made my elisp evolve :-)
This sounds like a LaTeX/AUCTeX-specific issue. IIUC, you prefer the
built-in latex-mode that AUCTeX supersedes, right? Or what do you mean
by bloated?
Jup, that was a purely LaTeX issue. And yes, I didn't have time to learn all the specifics
of AUCTeX and did some customisation + yasnippets to get my phD thesis written.
At that time, a switch from MSWord/OpenOffice to LaTeX was churning all my free CPU cycles,
because I had work and real life in parallel.
> Now seriously, One of the nicest things in Emacs is the package repo(s).
> I have the Emacs I want because we have use-package (and that is not so
> long ago)
> to make our lives (relatively) easy. And I dread to think what would happen
> WTR to size of the distributable object (.app in macos, .rpm/.deb/.snap in
> Linux,
> etc.) if we start shipping everything in it.
There are still plenty of cases where people cannot just install
packages over the net and are stuck with whatever Emacs is bundled with.
Good point...
ELPA remains useful to upgrade packages that don't depend on new core
features, but having "blessed" packages bundled without having to
explain to new-comers "well yes, Emacs can do that but you have to
install foo, bar and baaz first" (here "foo", "bar" and "baaz" are more
often than not some weird names that they cannot remember in the first
place) is helpful and underappreciated by many.
I get your point... and right, there are situations where you just can't get the
packages from the Internet.
WRT the package size, I wouldn't worry that much. Even a large package
like AUCTeX is just under 10MB in my /elpa/ directory. The mean package
side on ELPA is about 100-150KB. Packages like Debian that don't
bundled .el sources (instead just using .elc) by default might be even
better off.
But just keep in mind that there are situations, where the platform must deploy
Emacs on, might not be as relaxed WRT disk space... And it's not about a specific
package, it's about a trickle of packages becoming a flood...
> My .2 cents
--
Philip Kaludercic on peregrine