emacs-orgmode@gnu.org archives
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
* org-install.el in Emacs probably should be removed
@ 2009-02-15  7:50 Leo
  2009-02-15 20:03 ` Carsten Dominik
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Leo @ 2009-02-15  7:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: emacs-orgmode

Hi Carsten,

I just notice there is a dummy file in emacs/lisp/org. The use of this
file hides problems away for example if users install org to a dir that
is overshadowed by the lisp/org in emacs (this happen quite often to
newbies too). Two files with the same name but different content also
confuse other users.

I think for users using both standalone and included org versions, the
cleaner and better way is to use one of the following

  (load "org-install" t) or (require 'org-install nil t)

in their own .emacs files if they want to avoid error (we can put this
in the documentation). But I guess some will prefer emacs to throw an
error when that org-install that does autoloads is missing.

Pointing out the install procedure is only for installing standalone org
package is also sufficient.

Thus I propose we do away with this dummy file and keep the emacs
distribution clean.

Best,
-- 
.: Leo :. [ sdl.web AT gmail.com ] .: I use Emacs :.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: org-install.el in Emacs probably should be removed
  2009-02-15  7:50 org-install.el in Emacs probably should be removed Leo
@ 2009-02-15 20:03 ` Carsten Dominik
  2009-02-15 22:18   ` Tim O'Callaghan
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Carsten Dominik @ 2009-02-15 20:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Leo; +Cc: emacs-orgmode


On Feb 15, 2009, at 8:50 AM, Leo wrote:

> Hi Carsten,
>
> I just notice there is a dummy file in emacs/lisp/org. The use of this
> file hides problems away for example if users install org to a dir  
> that
> is overshadowed by the lisp/org in emacs (this happen quite often to
> newbies too). Two files with the same name but different content also
> confuse other users.
>
> I think for users using both standalone and included org versions, the
> cleaner and better way is to use one of the following
>
>  (load "org-install" t) or (require 'org-install nil t)
>
> in their own .emacs files if they want to avoid error (we can put this
> in the documentation). But I guess some will prefer emacs to throw an
> error when that org-install that does autoloads is missing.
>
> Pointing out the install procedure is only for installing standalone  
> org
> package is also sufficient.

This is what I have done extensively in the manual, but this has not
kept people from doing (require 'org) in .emacs.

I have been fighting hard to get people to use (require 'org-install),
so I did not want to punish them when they move to Emacs 23 and want
to use the Emacs version.  Admittedly, this is not very likely.

Also, I do want to keep the option that org-install will do more than
just install autoloads.

So while I don't have strong feelings about removing org-install
from Emacs again, I cannot really see the point either.

- Carsten

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: org-install.el in Emacs probably should be removed
  2009-02-15 20:03 ` Carsten Dominik
@ 2009-02-15 22:18   ` Tim O'Callaghan
  2009-02-15 22:40     ` Carsten Dominik
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Tim O'Callaghan @ 2009-02-15 22:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: org-mode

>
>  This is what I have done extensively in the manual, but this has not
>  kept people from doing (require 'org) in .emacs.
>
>  I have been fighting hard to get people to use (require 'org-install),
>  so I did not want to punish them when they move to Emacs 23 and want
>  to use the Emacs version.  Admittedly, this is not very likely.
>
>  Also, I do want to keep the option that org-install will do more than
>  just install autoloads.
>
>  So while I don't have strong feelings about removing org-install
>  from Emacs again, I cannot really see the point either.
>
>  - Carsten
>

The usage of org-install has the pre-requisite of having to compile
the org.el files. This is no use to people like myself, who want to
use the same .el files in XEmacs and Emacs due to incompatible .elc
problems. Its also no use to people who do no have a build system or
make binary installed e.g. windows users, locked down linux/unix
systems etc.

How about adding a skeleton org-install.el that gets overwritten by the make?

Tim.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: org-install.el in Emacs probably should be removed
  2009-02-15 22:18   ` Tim O'Callaghan
@ 2009-02-15 22:40     ` Carsten Dominik
  2009-02-16  3:32       ` Bernt Hansen
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Carsten Dominik @ 2009-02-15 22:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Tim O'Callaghan; +Cc: org-mode


On Feb 15, 2009, at 11:18 PM, Tim O'Callaghan wrote:

>>
>> This is what I have done extensively in the manual, but this has not
>> kept people from doing (require 'org) in .emacs.
>>
>> I have been fighting hard to get people to use (require 'org- 
>> install),
>> so I did not want to punish them when they move to Emacs 23 and want
>> to use the Emacs version.  Admittedly, this is not very likely.
>>
>> Also, I do want to keep the option that org-install will do more than
>> just install autoloads.
>>
>> So while I don't have strong feelings about removing org-install
>> from Emacs again, I cannot really see the point either.
>>
>> - Carsten
>>
>
> The usage of org-install has the pre-requisite of having to compile
> the org.el files. This is no use to people like myself, who want to
> use the same .el files in XEmacs and Emacs due to incompatible .elc
> problems. Its also no use to people who do no have a build system or
> make binary installed e.g. windows users, locked down linux/unix
> systems etc.
>
> How about adding a skeleton org-install.el that gets overwritten by  
> the make?

org-install.el is part of the distribution tar and zip files.
I cannot include it into the git repo because the git people tell
me that it is a bad idea to keep a product file under git
control (Bernt?).

The fact that producing org-install.el triggers some code
compilation (org org.el, to be exact, the others are compiled
because org.el depends on them) is a bug that I do not
understand - any make gurus around here who can sort this out?

If you have a system without make, then you should probably
not rely on the git distribution, but rather on the
snapshots.

- Carsten

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: org-install.el in Emacs probably should be removed
  2009-02-15 22:40     ` Carsten Dominik
@ 2009-02-16  3:32       ` Bernt Hansen
  2009-02-24 15:38         ` Tim O'Callaghan
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Bernt Hansen @ 2009-02-16  3:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Carsten Dominik; +Cc: org-mode

Carsten Dominik <dominik@science.uva.nl> writes:

> On Feb 15, 2009, at 11:18 PM, Tim O'Callaghan wrote:
>
>> The usage of org-install has the pre-requisite of having to compile
>> the org.el files. This is no use to people like myself, who want to
>> use the same .el files in XEmacs and Emacs due to incompatible .elc
>> problems. Its also no use to people who do no have a build system or
>> make binary installed e.g. windows users, locked down linux/unix
>> systems etc.
>>
>> How about adding a skeleton org-install.el that gets overwritten by
>> the make?
>
> org-install.el is part of the distribution tar and zip files.
> I cannot include it into the git repo because the git people tell
> me that it is a bad idea to keep a product file under git
> control (Bernt?).

The main reason this is a bad idea in git master branch is that the file
gets automatic changes on different systems and looks modified after
each time you run make.  This file gets in the way of other (real)
changes since git thinks the working tree is dirty and prevents changing
branches, rebasing, or merging with a dirty tree.  The contents of the
org-install.el file are uninteresting and really does not belong in the
tracked files for the project since it is a product of the build
procedure.

If you want a skeleton org-install.el in the tar/zip files then you
probably should generate that when producing the tar/zip files.

-Bernt

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: org-install.el in Emacs probably should be removed
  2009-02-16  3:32       ` Bernt Hansen
@ 2009-02-24 15:38         ` Tim O'Callaghan
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Tim O'Callaghan @ 2009-02-24 15:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Bernt Hansen; +Cc: org-mode

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2000 bytes --]

On 16/02/2009, Bernt Hansen <bernt@norang.ca> wrote:
> Carsten Dominik <dominik@science.uva.nl> writes:
>
>  > On Feb 15, 2009, at 11:18 PM, Tim O'Callaghan wrote:
>  >
>
> >> The usage of org-install has the pre-requisite of having to compile
>  >> the org.el files. This is no use to people like myself, who want to
>  >> use the same .el files in XEmacs and Emacs due to incompatible .elc
>  >> problems. Its also no use to people who do no have a build system or
>  >> make binary installed e.g. windows users, locked down linux/unix
>  >> systems etc.
>  >>
>  >> How about adding a skeleton org-install.el that gets overwritten by
>  >> the make?
>  >
>  > org-install.el is part of the distribution tar and zip files.
>  > I cannot include it into the git repo because the git people tell
>  > me that it is a bad idea to keep a product file under git
>  > control (Bernt?).
>
>
> The main reason this is a bad idea in git master branch is that the file
>  gets automatic changes on different systems and looks modified after
>  each time you run make.  This file gets in the way of other (real)
>  changes since git thinks the working tree is dirty and prevents changing
>  branches, rebasing, or merging with a dirty tree.  The contents of the
>  org-install.el file are uninteresting and really does not belong in the
>  tracked files for the project since it is a product of the build
>  procedure.
>
>  If you want a skeleton org-install.el in the tar/zip files then you
>  probably should generate that when producing the tar/zip files.
>
>
>  -Bernt
>

That is a fair point, its usually counter productive to put a build
product under revision control.

So for the sake of those looking for an example one, you'll find a
generated example attached, for V6.23b

I wonder if it is possible to implement a mechanism to check the
'freshness' of the org-install? say embedding the org-version number
it was created with, and org checking to see if it is compatible, or
needs updating?

Tim.

[-- Attachment #2: example-org-install.el --]
[-- Type: application/emacs-lisp, Size: 39040 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 204 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Emacs-orgmode mailing list
Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2009-02-24 15:38 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2009-02-15  7:50 org-install.el in Emacs probably should be removed Leo
2009-02-15 20:03 ` Carsten Dominik
2009-02-15 22:18   ` Tim O'Callaghan
2009-02-15 22:40     ` Carsten Dominik
2009-02-16  3:32       ` Bernt Hansen
2009-02-24 15:38         ` Tim O'Callaghan

Code repositories for project(s) associated with this inbox:

	https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs/org-mode.git

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).