From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: using use-package Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2015 11:08:02 -0400 Message-ID: References: <67cb463e-41f6-4f37-91ee-15d0fdb5ba9f@googlegroups.com> <20150812180621.32265.2E673ABE@ahiker.mooo.com> <20150813072506.GA21389@tuxteam.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1439478528 7010 80.91.229.3 (13 Aug 2015 15:08:48 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2015 15:08:48 +0000 (UTC) To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Aug 13 17:08:40 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ZPu7T-0002xN-M1 for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 13 Aug 2015 17:08:39 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:42976 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZPu7S-0005HY-Jl for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 13 Aug 2015 11:08:38 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:55830) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZPu7E-0005Gz-He for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 13 Aug 2015 11:08:28 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZPu79-0003N0-Hz for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 13 Aug 2015 11:08:24 -0400 Original-Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:42093) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZPu79-0003Mu-Ad for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 13 Aug 2015 11:08:19 -0400 Original-Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ZPu74-0002bU-W0 for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 13 Aug 2015 17:08:15 +0200 Original-Received: from 76-10-152-74.dsl.teksavvy.com ([76.10.152.74]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 13 Aug 2015 17:08:14 +0200 Original-Received: from monnier by 76-10-152-74.dsl.teksavvy.com with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 13 Aug 2015 17:08:14 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 45 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 76-10-152-74.dsl.teksavvy.com User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:NLBNHyqjSZ9Nu2hPAE/vnCgI0wI= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 80.91.229.3 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:106534 Archived-At: > FWIW, and based on a recent experience of mine, yes, I think both ways > are needed/useful and complement each other. Recently, I installed some > package from ELPA (magit) and it failed to byte-compile. I've yet to > investigate what went wrong (perhaps my Emacs version is too new/old, > what have you), but I now find myself wrangling with the complexities > of the package itself *and* those of the packaging system. Please do keep us informed of those problems: it's indeed very important to make package.el more robust. In the mean time, you can do: mv ~/.emacs.d/elpa/magit/*.elc ~/somewhere-for-analysis/ which should "fix" the problem (Magit will be slower, tho). We should probably also add a package-(re)compile command (after all, the compilation step is conceptually independent from the actual installation). > So some "wholly integrated solution" makes life easier only when things > work out (duh ;-) Otherwise it makes life harder, and what's more important > in my view -- it tends to make a stronger separation of "outer circle" > and "inner circle", making it more difficult to get involved. I tend to agree. My earlier package system attempt had less magic power. The main visible difference, is that instead of (package-initialize), the user had to use a bunch of (load "/foo/bar/pkg-autoloads.el") to activate each package. But fundamentally, (package-initialize) still does just that (i.e. it first looks for all installed packages, decides which to activate, in which order, and then does the corresponding `load's). Patches/suggestions to make this magic more transparent welcome. > Perhaps the only problem is in this "differently": if ELPA and use-package > manage to converge towards some set of common conventions, the end-user > is only to win (whereas I'm convinced that there must be a first phase > of divergence: how else are we going to explore different options?) Agreed. Hence my participation in this thread ;-) Stefan