From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49347) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dOTkT-0007O5-JN for guix-patches@gnu.org; Fri, 23 Jun 2017 14:56:11 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dOTkQ-0000JC-GW for guix-patches@gnu.org; Fri, 23 Jun 2017 14:56:05 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:60312) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dOTkQ-0000J2-E0 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Fri, 23 Jun 2017 14:56:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dOTkQ-0000X5-7p for guix-patches@gnu.org; Fri, 23 Jun 2017 14:56:02 -0400 Subject: [bug#27302] [PATCH 1/2] gnu: Add emacs-dired-hacks-utils. Resent-Message-ID: From: Alex Kost References: <20170610010532.27495-1-go.wigust@gmail.com> <871sqkp0og.fsf@gmail.com> <877f03rdsd.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2017 21:55:31 +0300 In-Reply-To: <877f03rdsd.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic \=\?utf-8\?Q\?Court\=C3\=A8s\=22'\?\= \=\?utf-8\?Q\?s\?\= message of "Thu, 22 Jun 2017 22:02:58 +0200") Message-ID: <87shiqilek.fsf@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-patches" To: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Cc: 27302@debbugs.gnu.org Ludovic Court=C3=A8s (2017-06-22 22:02 +0200) wrote: > Hi! > > Alex Kost skribis: > >> Hello, thanks for the patches and sorry for the delay! >> >> I see that this "dired-hacks" repository is split into multiple packages >> on MELPA, and you follow this path, however I think it would be much >> easier for us just to have a single "emacs-dired-hacks" package. >> Otherwise, we'll have to pick single files for all these "dired-open", >> "dired-avfs" and other packages, which is not convenient. >> >> What do you think? Are there any objections on making a single >> "dired-hacks" package? > > I think Oleg=E2=80=99s lack of response might suggest that we should appl= y the > patch as-is. :-) WDYT, Alex? Having separate packages may be better > than nothing at all. Right, the problem however is that MELPA sources are used to get these packages. I can make a single "dired-hacks" package if it's reasonable. OTOH if multiple packages are somehow "better", then we have to make multiple recipes. --=20 Alex