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: Feature branches review please (ivy hello) Date: Fri, 06 Nov 2020 09:55:24 -0500 Message-ID: References: <234bba7f-fd5c-ed39-8a5e-8a6ce3125bf1@inventati.org> <86v9eibupz.fsf@gmail.com> <83imai8tkk.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="30653"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: ohwoeowho@gmail.com, bugs@gnu.support, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Nov 06 15:56:05 2020 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 1kb39p-0007rT-A4 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 06 Nov 2020 15:56:05 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:33646 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kb39o-0003hX-8V for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 06 Nov 2020 09:56:04 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:56924) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kb39G-0003FX-Vc for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 06 Nov 2020 09:55:31 -0500 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:19563) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kb39E-0005rx-Gr; Fri, 06 Nov 2020 09:55:30 -0500 Original-Received: from pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id ADED9440BA3; Fri, 6 Nov 2020 09:55:26 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 408864407F9; Fri, 6 Nov 2020 09:55:25 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1604674525; bh=sUhAMKlTnxba0bo19xWp1I+O6j09z+vVGaw9JRopgV4=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=TLZBbqjYssbDTpse3enJW0iG8SWA2prAdAhlRIYykQ2bnHkmVfgrkrO3tfyXG6Jve 6dbs4qRrJ39zcLVKO+DB5GlMZUKcr8Ampgr1PeWHJZ30ekZheVkIYCmXkLSTw0Xwr3 YU+jzYgSSeEkTBdql5zTSmFXvE6tTuRpBCSF3thOmikV3MJlU+jEDLur5qOWCtMaq1 68oTj2298B7cwGTO2nJT8u3IjKWULl1HDc/EiwXQV+Sql4aZpEPenJdFGqKlrQgKrZ wKV6wVUyrrPRtsWz/ZsgqT5GiSQ9EhlPhCvKtWe7sWRBFlKXBYl4gYaXYhJfqePLMc xR/6tBiSHadUg== Original-Received: from alfajor (unknown [157.52.9.240]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 033EF120302; Fri, 6 Nov 2020 09:55:24 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <83imai8tkk.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Fri, 06 Nov 2020 16:10:19 +0200") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/11/06 08:56:47 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] 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: 2.1.23 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" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:258821 Archived-At: >> > I have seen previous discussion about it entering main Emacs. >> > Question: Why not? >> FWIW, here's my take on it: a package should be included in Emacs >> if it's activated by default or if it's a library that's required by >> many other packages. > We didn't make such a decision, AFAIK, Indeed, I only stated my opinion. > and as a matter of fact, a large part of what comes today with Emacs > doesn't pass this test. Yup. And moving packages out of Emacs is extra work with very little payback. There's theory and then there's practice ;-) > A prerequisite for making such a decision would be to find a way of > bundling ELPA packages into an Emacs tarball when preparing a > release. We haven't yet found the way of doing that, although some > discussions were held about what would that entail. FWIW, there's an existing patch which does that. It's more a question of making the decision and then managing the consequences. > Personally, I think promoting the above concept before the decision > was made is something to avoid, because it sends the wrong message. What I wrote above is not any kind of decision. It's "my take on it". And that's been my take on it for many years now, and it guides the way I argue for or against inclusion of packages in Emacs and in GNU ELPA. Stefan