From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Xebar Saram Subject: Re: Remove Org from Emacs repository? Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2016 20:46:18 +0200 Message-ID: References: <871sx5pp6u.fsf@laptoptop.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f403045eb3daf45eb60543f337d1 Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:33478) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cIgTV-0004UZ-VX for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 18 Dec 2016 13:46:23 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cIgTU-0000d6-KU for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 18 Dec 2016 13:46:22 -0500 Received: from mail-yb0-x242.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4002:c09::242]:35875) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cIgTU-0000c8-F0 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 18 Dec 2016 13:46:20 -0500 Received: by mail-yb0-x242.google.com with SMTP id d128so6654433ybh.3 for ; Sun, 18 Dec 2016 10:46:18 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Emacs-orgmode" To: Christian Moe Cc: Carsten Dominik , "emacs-orgmode@gnu.org" , aaermolov@gmail.com, Reuben Thomas --f403045eb3daf45eb60543f337d1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 +1 for keeping it in i often debug my org based init config by launching emacs -Q and its great to have org built in for that :) Z On Sun, Dec 18, 2016 at 7:11 PM, Christian Moe wrote: > > +1. > > (= Keep it in.) > > Yours, > Christian > > Carsten Dominik writes: > > > Dear all, > > > > I'd hate to see Org removed from Emacs. It took a lot of work to get it > > in, and I believe that the vast majority of Emacs users does not install > > packages. For a newbie to get to Emacs and to be able to open a .org > file > > is a big plus. So my vote goes toward keeping it in. > > > > Carsten > > > > On Sun, Dec 18, 2016 at 10:22 AM, wrote: > > > >> 2 cents from me... > >> > >> Besides I continuously see many users praising Emacs just for Org > >> presence (they even may be completely non-technical users), I'm > >> personally think Org may be removed from Emacs distribution because: > >> > >> 1) all Reuben's argument seems sane; > >> 2) there are situations when someone wants particular version of Org, > >> and it may be not tne one bundled with Emacs. In this case someone > >> should perform extra steps to ensure things are going the right way. > >> When Org will be available only from ELPA, it will be SPOT for such > >> cases. > >> > >> Reuben Thomas writes: > >> > >> > Now that Emacs has had package.el for some years, and Org is > installable > >> > directly from GNU ELPA, would it be a good idea to remove Org from > >> Emacs's > >> > source repository? > >> > > >> > The current situation is left over from before Emacs had package.el, > and > >> I > >> > see no compelling reason to keep it. Org is too big and distinct to be > >> > swallowed by Emacs; it doesn't make much sense to keep its current > >> half-in, > >> > half-out state; so logically it seems sensible to take it out. > >> > > >> > I am asking this question from an Org point of view; I will ask the > Emacs > >> > maintainers separately for their perspective. > >> > > >> > I think it would benefit Emacs too, as there would be less code to > >> maintain > >> > (even though Org is quasi-external at present, it still has to build > >> > successfully as part of an Emacs build), and the Emacs distribution > would > >> > be slimmer for non-Org users. > >> > > >> > Of course, Emacs "distributions" would still be able to include Org > >> > out-of-the box if they wished. > >> > > >> > -- > >> > http://rrt.sc3d.org > >> > > > --f403045eb3daf45eb60543f337d1 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
+1 for keeping it in

i often debug my o= rg based init config by launching emacs -Q and its great to have org built = in for that :)

Z

On Sun, Dec 18, 2016 at 7:11 PM, Christ= ian Moe <mail@christianmoe.com> wrote:

+1.

(=3D Keep it in.)

Yours,
Christian

Carsten Dominik writes:

> Dear all,
>
> I'd hate to see Org removed from Emacs.=C2=A0 It took a lot of wor= k to get it
> in, and I believe that the vast majority of Emacs users does not insta= ll
> packages.=C2=A0 For a newbie to get to Emacs and to be able to open a = .org file
> is a big plus.=C2=A0 So my vote goes toward keeping it in.
>
> Carsten
>
> On Sun, Dec 18, 2016 at 10:22 AM, <aaermolov@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> 2 cents from me...
>>
>> Besides I continuously see many users praising Emacs just for Org<= br> >> presence (they even may be completely non-technical users), I'= m
>> personally think Org may be removed from Emacs distribution becaus= e:
>>
>> 1) all Reuben's argument seems sane;
>> 2) there are situations when someone wants particular version of O= rg,
>>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 and it may be not tne one bundled with Emacs. In this= case someone
>>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 should perform extra steps to ensure things are going= the right way.
>>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 When Org will be available only from ELPA, it will be= SPOT for such
>> cases.
>>
>> Reuben Thomas <rrt@sc3d.org= > writes:
>>
>> > Now that Emacs has had package.el for some years, and Org is = installable
>> > directly from GNU ELPA, would it be a good idea to remove Org= from
>> Emacs's
>> > source repository?
>> >
>> > The current situation is left over from before Emacs had pack= age.el, and
>> I
>> > see no compelling reason to keep it. Org is too big and disti= nct to be
>> > swallowed by Emacs; it doesn't make much sense to keep it= s current
>> half-in,
>> > half-out state; so logically it seems sensible to take it out= .
>> >
>> > I am asking this question from an Org point of view; I will a= sk the Emacs
>> > maintainers separately for their perspective.
>> >
>> > I think it would benefit Emacs too, as there would be less co= de to
>> maintain
>> > (even though Org is quasi-external at present, it still has t= o build
>> > successfully as part of an Emacs build), and the Emacs distri= bution would
>> > be slimmer for non-Org users.
>> >
>> > Of course, Emacs "distributions" would still be abl= e to include Org
>> > out-of-the box if they wished.
>> >
>> > --
>> > http://rrt.sc3d.org
>>



--f403045eb3daf45eb60543f337d1--