Re: emacs-29 09d6070e56e: ; Improve and update documentation of built-in package upgrades

Re: emacs-29 09d6070e56e: ; Improve and update documentation of built-in package upgrades

[Ruijie Yu via Emacs development discussions.]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

> branch: emacs-29
> commit 09d6070e56ea21a5e9720bc619c439c09e5b2680
> Author: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
> Commit: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
>
>     ; Improve and update documentation of built-in package upgrades
>     
>     * doc/emacs/package.texi (Package Statuses, Package Menu)
>     (Package Installation):
>     * etc/NEWS: Document the options and caveats of upgrading built-in
>     packages.
> ---
>  doc/emacs/package.texi | 50 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
>  etc/NEWS               |  7 +++++++
>  2 files changed, 54 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

> [...]

> +In addition, when this option is non-nil, built-in packages for which
> +a new version is available in archives can be upgraded via the package
> +menu produced by 'M-x list-packages'.  If you do set this option
> +non-nil, we recommend not to use the 'U' command, but instead to use
> +'/ u' to show the packages which can be upgraded, and then unmark the
> +built-in packages which you don't need to overwrite from the archives.

> [...]

When you run `/ u' on the package list buffer, you don't automatically
mark anything for upgrading, so saying "unmark" out-of-the-blue is a bit
strange to me.

For reference, you "mark" upgrades by `U', and then "execute" all queued
actions (upgrades, installs, deletions, etc) by `x'.  `/ u' filters the
list of packages to only those which are upgradable, and nothing else.

Maybe we should say one of the following proof-of-concept changes?

    ... we recommend not to execute the 'x' command immediately after
    the 'U' command, but instead ....

    ... but instead to use '/ u' to show the packages which can be
    upgraded, and then mark the built-in packages which you are okay
    with upgrading from the archives.

    ... but instead to use '/ u' to show the packages which can be
    upgraded, then 'U' to mark all all upgradable packages, and then
    unmark the built-in packages which you don't need to overwrite ....

Hope this helps.

-- 
Best,


RY

Re: emacs-29 09d6070e56e: ; Improve and update documentation of built-in package upgrades

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Ruijie Yu <ruijie@netyu.xyz>
> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Date: Fri, 12 May 2023 22:09:19 +0800
> 
> 
> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
> 
> > +In addition, when this option is non-nil, built-in packages for which
> > +a new version is available in archives can be upgraded via the package
> > +menu produced by 'M-x list-packages'.  If you do set this option
> > +non-nil, we recommend not to use the 'U' command, but instead to use
> > +'/ u' to show the packages which can be upgraded, and then unmark the
> > +built-in packages which you don't need to overwrite from the archives.
> 
> > [...]
> 
> When you run `/ u' on the package list buffer, you don't automatically
> mark anything for upgrading, so saying "unmark" out-of-the-blue is a bit
> strange to me.

Thanks, fixed.

> Maybe we should say one of the following proof-of-concept changes?
> 
>     ... we recommend not to execute the 'x' command immediately after
>     the 'U' command, but instead ....
> 
>     ... but instead to use '/ u' to show the packages which can be
>     upgraded, and then mark the built-in packages which you are okay
>     with upgrading from the archives.
> 
>     ... but instead to use '/ u' to show the packages which can be
>     upgraded, then 'U' to mark all all upgradable packages, and then
>     unmark the built-in packages which you don't need to overwrite ....

I don't (yet) see the need for that.  I think telling people to stay
away of 'U' if they customize this new variable is good enough for
NEWS.  The manual tells more.