From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Richard Riley Subject: Re: ELPA Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 21:09:32 +0200 Message-ID: References: <87tylcy6gw.fsf@stats.ox.ac.uk> <87hbhc5rtt.fsf@Rainer.invalid> <87r5ggs6u6.fsf@stats.ox.ac.uk> <87tylce24o.fsf@Rainer.invalid> <87iq1srzoj.fsf_-_@stats.ox.ac.uk> <87eicdiwsy.fsf@gmail.com> <87iq1plmmu.fsf@Rainer.invalid> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=58255 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1P0fYm-0008En-Te for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 28 Sep 2010 15:09:54 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1P0fYk-0002NG-OO for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 28 Sep 2010 15:09:52 -0400 Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:37877) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1P0fYk-0002MU-J7 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 28 Sep 2010 15:09:50 -0400 Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1P0fYh-00016U-JG for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 28 Sep 2010 21:09:47 +0200 Received: from 85.183.18.158 ([85.183.18.158]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 28 Sep 2010 21:09:47 +0200 Received: from rileyrg by 85.183.18.158 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 28 Sep 2010 21:09:47 +0200 List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Achim Gratz writes: > "Eric Schulte" writes: >> I would think that it only makes sense to have one Org-mode package in >> ELPA, namely the bleeding edge git version of Org-mode. > > I disagree and my vote is still on 'maint', i.e. what a user would be > most likely to install if he was visiting orgmode.org. Master changes > too often and might have experimental commits that later get reversed. > For anybody not following the mailing list this would be exactly the > wrong version to get through ELPA, especially since ELPA (at least in > standard configuration) does not notify about new versions. I'd be interested to hear how many people actually use ELPA. I haunt the #emacs channel a little bit and I know only a handful that use it. Is the idea that it will be used more or central to emacs in the future?