From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Why are so many great packages not trying to get included in GNU Emacs? Date: Sat, 09 May 2020 09:45:00 -0400 Message-ID: References: <9mmFgzvrBwjt_n_VJyaJdXINraNi5HsGpwq-0MLeKiJA7kG2BQA4uywrzjyz7lpRS0OZDpjEi8lspOKYUA7P_QsODsDew_8nbH960G55fmY=@protonmail.com> <97DA7804-F647-4A1D-B8E0-AFFE7A324C64@gmail.com> <87d07xamrg.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <878silajdl.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <87tv18pyh4.fsf@russet.org.uk> <877dxme268.fsf@russet.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="52063"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: eric@ericabrahamsen.net, casouri@gmail.com, ndame@protonmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, Phillip Lord To: Richard Stallman Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat May 09 15:45:52 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 1jXPnc-000DQC-Dc for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 09 May 2020 15:45:52 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:58250 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jXPna-0007Oc-Vq for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 09 May 2020 09:45:50 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:50722) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jXPmx-0006lW-CY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 09 May 2020 09:45:11 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:35644) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jXPmv-00038k-U0; Sat, 09 May 2020 09:45:10 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 14EC2100F93; Sat, 9 May 2020 09:45:08 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 15986100EE7; Sat, 9 May 2020 09:45:02 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1589031902; bh=kxl5usbwnPXO3d65N1hvvp3OrKJtplQRmw/xGjDC7M0=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=a4YxM4KgSnz8J9mS7BCkZxNDC271fq1TR4fU3SKeGTuw0VwhUABS7MbEZEfuIj/2o Xx8q3oF84Lvfwb2BrIFqc68CBVYz/WnbcHW4afeJbq3s/jw+3/dLmlR5VjLjFRrNEn AeAx+b42yXKQylWyIVUCMRrxsGuoJGfPN7AwjVIm4kpazxlTNdm7sKDV1HMiX4R5Mb a+WgMgBOlZwSHn4uiswR22gqDYY3byfNnSSsQrQ0zmtcfkvqIwGe9f1pYLj2l3UlkL 8UFwB9zGBNaa3+ZztvgGPoCMDiE2sjZISHpKP/H/GV5/q5XxAyo7I4O/0xjAdI4Wb7 vw6zEqzJq/sbQ== Original-Received: from alfajor (unknown [216.154.3.202]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 638E81202FA; Sat, 9 May 2020 09:45:01 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Richard Stallman's message of "Fri, 08 May 2020 23:53:35 -0400") 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 = 2020/05/09 09:45:08 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_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001 autolearn=_AUTOLEARN 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:249432 Archived-At: > I'm in favor in principle of automating the checking, at least > partially. But we need to carefully study the details. That's been the status quo for at least ten years. So, apparently, no, there's no hope for improvement here. Stefan