From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Updating the "ELPA Protocol" Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2022 11:46:56 -0500 Message-ID: References: <164484721900.31751.1453162457552427931@vcs2.savannah.gnu.org> <87leoond7l.fsf@posteo.net> <83r0yfzz01.fsf@gnu.org> <87bkpjyx3p.fsf@posteo.net> <83bkpjynmj.fsf@gnu.org> <87iljqya44.fsf@posteo.net> <8335auzo9s.fsf@gnu.org> <87zgd2ws8z.fsf@posteo.net> <831qqezkxj.fsf@gnu.org> <87y1slgq3m.fsf@posteo.net> <87bkpgfsqv.fsf@posteo.net> <87educ9fei.fsf@posteo.net> <87y1sk7xtg.fsf_-_@posteo.net> <87h6z0rnuz.fsf@posteo.net> <87mt8r8i7j.fsf@posteo.net> <87r0y2ncdd.fsf@posteo.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="34722"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/29.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: Stefan Kangas , Eli Zaretskii , rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org, Lars Ingebrigtsen To: Philip Kaludercic Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Nov 16 17:47:59 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1ovLZt-0008lR-Lb for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 16 Nov 2022 17:47:57 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ovLZD-0000mK-77; Wed, 16 Nov 2022 11:47:15 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ovLZB-0000i2-Bp for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 16 Nov 2022 11:47:13 -0500 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ovLZ7-0001ec-MN; Wed, 16 Nov 2022 11:47:12 -0500 Original-Received: from pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 48A1A100142; Wed, 16 Nov 2022 11:47:06 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id B2A471000E6; Wed, 16 Nov 2022 11:47:04 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1668617224; bh=3FypeNuuQCHk4gKVyYHrxwDPctObwPVvalisfVg/8ig=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=DFK1kVexvOc325kMqL6vGhVicteaRJPYjXLghHmgwlyCoZSFZ0EVqUARXqwnV6wzo VMzGlgmpiTZUqdaarFXMe53GEd2ERyWKgdxOL/CYnzdGuV5n225uLTjBQojjll7ubO LCj1aBQhg4sHjPWLfrtlDoWpibJLMMUKES2tsLDVb6JwW/JCaJSFeVV9conKZ+t9G3 JBrbMaxg7OAEivyMpqv0QGsoRmUEckvW4PQ1NSWhh14FhNjLky7eokI0Vo9r9XSNEr ZoM5XStstfrZlfpSVSnNoxakYYj2NS5tUrKFvZu0OZ6GBSftTLL2VV2Agfj3uSB0P2 6zLlIoYS3t5uw== Original-Received: from lechazo (lechon.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.27.242]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 94FB51203CD; Wed, 16 Nov 2022 11:47:04 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <87r0y2ncdd.fsf@posteo.net> (Philip Kaludercic's message of "Wed, 16 Nov 2022 15:32:46 +0000") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-Spam_score_int: -42 X-Spam_score: -4.3 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:299950 Archived-At: >> I think we'd need more details and concrete examples to judge how best >> handle such renamings. The problem I see is that in Emacs, names are >> very visible: the package name almost inevitably affect the ELisp >> files's names, which themselves affect the functions and vars defined >> therein. >> >> For that reason handling the renaming only in ELPA is rarely sufficient. >> And also for that reason, renamings are rare. > > From what I know this happens from time to time on MELPA. The changes > usually have to be backwards-compatible or the renames must be trivial > (a change like "foo" -> "foo-mode" or vice versa). Interesting. It would be great to have a (more or less exhaustive) list of renamings that took place in MELPA. > True, but I can imagine it causing confusion, when you find the actually > selected package being empty and the real package listed as a "mere" > dependency. I don't find it particularly confusing in Debian, because the new empty package usually describes itself fairly clearly as some kind of "transition package" where it say gives instructions on how to go about it (that you can remove it, etc..). Stefan