Re: package-vc support for :files keyword

[Daniel Fleischer <danflscr@gmail.com>]

Philip Kaludercic <philipk@posteo.net> writes:

> Right, as the primary technical inspiration for package-vc has been
> elpa-admin, and therefore we (re-)use GNU ELPA-style package
> specifications.

Hi, I wasn't aware there's a style guide for ELPA packages.

> No, just like `:ignored-files' I do not see a sensible way to implement
> it without compromising on the primary goal mentioned above.

I don't understand this part: `:ignored-files' is part of the ELPA
documentation and you are saying it's still not supported?

> Generally speaking, this is a style of package development that
> {GNU,NonGNU} ELPA would like to advise against perusing, in favour of
> a one-repo-per-package approach. Do you have a specific reason why you
> think that something like `:{ignored-,}files' are useful in general
> (i.e. not just because of the contingent fact that MELPA has
> popularised this form of development).

One example is tests; having test files either in the root folder or in
a folder called "tests", how do you prevent them from being evaluated?
They could have additional dev dependencies that you might not want to
have. What is the ELPA guideline about that?