From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp1 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms0.migadu.com with LMTPS id oIbPMdnhmmCCUQEAgWs5BA (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 11 May 2021 21:58:17 +0200 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp1 with LMTPS id WyBVLdnhmmApHAAAbx9fmQ (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 11 May 2021 19:58:17 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5230513FA8 for ; Tue, 11 May 2021 21:58:17 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([::1]:56856 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lgYWG-0007Ey-FP for larch@yhetil.org; Tue, 11 May 2021 15:58:16 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:33314) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lgYW3-0007DA-OE for bug-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 11 May 2021 15:58:03 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:54215) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lgYW2-0002WM-H0 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 11 May 2021 15:58:03 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lgYW2-0002Lm-GY for bug-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 11 May 2021 15:58:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#48331: Emacs' describe-package doesn't work for packages managed by guix Resent-From: Leo Prikler Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 11 May 2021 19:58:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 48331 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Andrew Tropin Received: via spool by 48331-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B48331.16207630318966 (code B ref 48331); Tue, 11 May 2021 19:58:02 +0000 Received: (at 48331) by debbugs.gnu.org; 11 May 2021 19:57:11 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37526 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lgYVC-0002KT-P1 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 11 May 2021 15:57:11 -0400 Received: from mailrelay.tugraz.at ([129.27.2.202]:57574) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lgYVA-0002KH-4z for 48331@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 11 May 2021 15:57:09 -0400 Received: from nijino.local (91-114-247-246.adsl.highway.telekom.at [91.114.247.246]) by mailrelay.tugraz.at (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4Ffpbg48Rqz3x8F; Tue, 11 May 2021 21:57:03 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tugraz.at; s=mailrelay; t=1620763023; bh=yX30V6mXr1kVIeqkqT6Bltcii812sBWLitmzkWteoJE=; h=Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References; b=NS7it26/lilEvoLEqmoWGbOkAgv5Sp8BbHyHbTaS4VLVnQvm4QnfPDMt3N7YxvKZc 4eFl3mxEzZzlEY+cH9z0yj/CdsrANUJWvw/1z8sWtamTssvQHRPYBtrVLDb6zx0FtT JfVtn9A6E5Xu1C443ZF3b1UVlG1x3bKT7/wyITEY= Message-ID: <6cba9730ace19ecebc397023b243cdb02486cc0c.camel@student.tugraz.at> From: Leo Prikler Date: Tue, 11 May 2021 21:57:02 +0200 In-Reply-To: References: <87im3r81so.fsf@trop.in> <78cfb495305fb1137da26e37a7ae5dd9467043bf.camel@student.tugraz.at> <8164abe40ec6e865bf8385e010702cfe158dabcc.camel@student.tugraz.at> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" User-Agent: Evolution 3.34.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-TUG-Backscatter-control: bt4lQm5Tva3SBgCuw0EnZw X-Spam-Scanner: SpamAssassin 3.003001 X-Spam-Score-relay: -1.9 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.74 on 129.27.10.117 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-guix@gnu.org List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: 48331@debbugs.gnu.org, Maxim Cournoyer Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1620763097; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding:resent-cc: resent-from:resent-sender:resent-message-id:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post:dkim-signature; bh=yX30V6mXr1kVIeqkqT6Bltcii812sBWLitmzkWteoJE=; b=HsK3wXMt3gGuStH5yXNM/ZWGuKny1RphLV562NonUKHxZR3lo9+SKXbDnSCm38/USvsRNl iSgm3nGXwhfxd8SmpA13NgGhZ458cfMDJNl06lCMn4dXr+Kq5wgfGkxk3AQ21W/88cmiLl z5ZPxYOnYJ8f/rDgay0XO45fRWxCwxf3LTZu4f422m9/dY4jGqawsFHlkf5YMLRYvrUfO7 I+fayqxBN1gHVWJIQn3xh5rOjW/2WxZD5TUn3K6fQzjr9UUhT7PArfyQoazERsJuJZsFI+ BZgLg4fBzehDn/WjUbag5Fp4XTPdBit0Hf5JvJBL9mB4Etb1hbarx6XiKLLBcA== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1620763097; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=G4D2ccaDontIOP8mhDhMxwdKtHTxsLW7NZQvDFX97IgqOaix0JvqMl/bXt0SXA5c05Ysqf iXiDL0f5td+guX6P+PbovRyB5oMY5xBQgTjT9yf8Dfij6ypqzXGFO++NBrpXS2he/3mASM e9x80UUNwP3QaTI8+IJjxjwZf0VJO/49yEhDH7MHhj0T1AD8QtnJXGCUYcALojDDjiUsyt 71pb2kYZ03anthDv8pEmkikapygxDHRJWR2eIOhPb84QGpzGRk++fPRxQzm3+oWC2fKg1W kRFased7byZ3L8IfwBOIVebbHeY4PiWqogh7cmSmGOyD6F3nct7tsnFK319ZpQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=tugraz.at header.s=mailrelay header.b="NS7it26/"; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of bug-guix-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=bug-guix-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -1.35 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=tugraz.at header.s=mailrelay header.b="NS7it26/"; dmarc=fail reason="SPF not aligned (relaxed)" header.from=student.tugraz.at (policy=none); spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of bug-guix-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=bug-guix-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 5230513FA8 X-Spam-Score: -1.35 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn0.migadu.com X-TUID: E5+Ed7inDwSs Am Dienstag, den 11.05.2021, 21:55 +0300 schrieb Andrew Tropin: > > the "-pkg\\.el$" exclude might have existed for a reason > > (I don't know which, put perhaps byte compilation). > > Perhaps it should be ignored during byte compilation, but still > installing it seems to be a good idea. Ok, let's wait for Maxim > answer. I think we agree on that. > > I know people take package.el for granted nowadays, but alternative > > package managers for Emacs have their uses. This is not just a > > Guix thing :) > > Why not take it for granted?) It's built-in since 24(?), elpa/melpa > archives respect it format and provide package descriptions in > -pkg.el format, AFAIK. el-get[1] is still active. straight.el[2] is another package manager for Emacs, its README comparing 5+1 approaches for package mangers, including el-get and package.el. Those are very much wild lands, I say. Not to speak for all the distro-specific ways of handling things. Gentoo had (and probably still has) an overlay, that magically creates Gentoo packages from elpa – in which of course they drop the -pkg.el. Debian has a mix of elpa packages and non-elpa ones, some of which naturally don't have the -pkg.el either. (Also their packages use site-lisp/elpa-src instead of site-lisp/elpa). Arch also seems to install at least some Elisp packages "directly" in site-lisp/$PACKAGE. > Most other package managers seem to respect "infrastructure" provided > by package.el. I don't think that statement is well-supported by the data we have. > Don't see too many reasons not to follow this format. > > I mean it's easily fixable with current directory structure just by > stripping "/elpa" suffix from package-directory-list, but why we > would do that emacs "customization" instead of just placing packages > under /elpa subdirectory and make everything work out of the box? Why should we let ELPA dictate our layout? I have not even once tried customizing package.el for actual use since I got Guix, because the elpa importer is trivial. > > I don't think we want to fake elpa that hard. Two iterations ago > > it was .guix.d and people didn't really like it. > > Do you mean the package installation path was site-lisp/.guix.d/NAME- > VERSION? Yep, that was a kinda ELPA-y convention while also remaining more true to what we're doing. > > My subdirs.el patch is also stretching it. > > Not sure what you mean by this, sorry, I'm not native speaker and > automated translation doesn't make sense to me. Rephrase please. The patch, which I've made, that adds subdirs.el is not uncontroversial. > I do not insist on any particular directory structure, just curious > why not to stick to the widely adopted format. Once again, thank you > for placing packages into subdirectories, now the site-lisp structure > seems more organized and less polluted + problem with describe- > package (C-h P) and list-packages are easily fixable. Appreciate > your work!) I hope I've shed some light as to how "wide" this adoption actually is – Emacs users are a contentious people. Just because something is "the default" and enjoys being shipped with Emacs itself doesn't mean that everyone is happy with it. Thus we're not trying to keep in line with any specific package manager, we just need to make things work "with Emacs" in the sense that packages installed via Guix should have working autoloads and one should be able to (require ...) them. Regards, Leo [1] https://github.com/dimitri/el-get [2] https://github.com/raxod502/straight.el