From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Tom Tromey Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Forcing reinstall in package.el Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 13:06:30 -0700 Message-ID: References: <87sjy03uyw.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87y67rytjc.fsf@lifelogs.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1292443609 1168 80.91.229.12 (15 Dec 2010 20:06:49 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 20:06:49 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Ted Zlatanov Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Dec 15 21:06:43 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PSxcY-0006NQ-O3 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 15 Dec 2010 21:06:42 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33823 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PSxcY-0004GD-9O for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 15 Dec 2010 15:06:42 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=44190 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PSxcT-0004DL-9M for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 15 Dec 2010 15:06:38 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PSxcR-0007Ao-U1 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 15 Dec 2010 15:06:37 -0500 Original-Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:4952) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PSxcR-0007AR-Jb for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 15 Dec 2010 15:06:35 -0500 Original-Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id oBFK6Xud028324 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 15 Dec 2010 15:06:33 -0500 Original-Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id oBFK6XHP028541; Wed, 15 Dec 2010 15:06:33 -0500 Original-Received: from opsy.redhat.com (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id oBFK6WwF023595; Wed, 15 Dec 2010 15:06:32 -0500 Original-Received: by opsy.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id CE045379182; Wed, 15 Dec 2010 13:06:31 -0700 (MST) X-Attribution: Tom In-Reply-To: <87y67rytjc.fsf@lifelogs.com> (Ted Zlatanov's message of "Wed, 15 Dec 2010 08:55:51 -0600") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.68 on 10.5.11.23 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:133721 Archived-At: >>>>> "Ted" == Ted Zlatanov writes: PH> To be honest, I'd prefer it if overwriting were the default behaviour PH> for all installations, but I hesitated to suggest a wide-sweeping PH> change like that. =) Ted> I think that's reasonable, since the user chooses what to upgrade from Ted> the package list. Chong, Stefan, what do you think? I think the current behavior is better. Usually installing something that has the same or lesser version is a user error. Only a subset of users will actually want to force-overwrite a package. A prefix argument would be ok by me. Or just a new command. Tom