Hi Stefan,

On 10/24/22 15:51, Stefan Monnier wrote:

> Hmm... this seems to clearly point to a bug in `elpa-admin.el`.
> 
> I wonder how we end up generating a `ement-pkg.el` that contains this
> Git revision id, with a `0.4` version, the correct files, but the wrong
> set of requires.
> 
> [... reading the code...]
> 
> Hmm... it looks like we get most of the metadata for `<PKG>-pkg.el` from
> the HEAD before we select the actual revision from which we'll build the
> tarball :-(
> 
> This is ugly.  It probably messed up several existing tarballs, actually
> (just in a way sufficiently "harmless" that noone complained loudly
> enough yet).

Well, it's good that it was finally discovered.  :)

>> Aside: This is one way in which MELPA is a bit easier to work with: although
>> MELPA Stable is generally not recommended for use (due to various issues),
>> it builds packages from version tags rather than git master (regular MELPA
>> builds from git master); if ELPA worked the same way, I could easily tag
>> a v0.4.1 independently of what's on the master branch.
> 
> We can actually do something similar currently by adding
> a `:version-map` in the `elpa-packages` spec to make a release
> from an arbitrary Git commit (it's better avoided but was introduced to
> handle cases where the upstream doesn't have any `Version:` header, as
> well as to allow building a new tarball with a different version number
> in case the original build was broken for some reason, as in our case).
> 
>> Given that, would it be possible to have ELPA build from a separate branch?
>> That's how I organize some of my other packages, with a "stable" branch and
>> a master branch.  If ELPA pulled from a "stable" branch, I could push a fix
>> to that while the next major version is still in development.
> 
> We can also do that, yes, using the `:release-branch`.

Okay, that sounds good to me.  Please see the attached patch to 
elpa-packages, which sets the release-branch to "stable".  I've already 
pushed such a branch to the repo, at the v0.4 commit.

Will this patch cause the package to be rebuilt for v0.4, or do I need 
to make a v0.4.1 release to trigger that?

Thanks,
Adam