From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Lars Ingebrigtsen Subject: Re: Sync up the org in emacs master to org maint branch? Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2017 16:15:11 +0100 Message-ID: References: <87k29d7zvw.fsf@engster.org> <87fuk08i01.fsf@engster.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: In-Reply-To: (John Wiegley's message of "Tue, 31 Jan 2017 10:08:33 -0500") List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Emacs-devel" To: David Engster Cc: Bastien Guerry , Kaushal Modi , Phillip Lord , emacs-org list , Emacs developers List-Id: emacs-orgmode.gnu.org John Wiegley writes: > So far, all of these arguments against a tighter development integration with > ELPA have been predicated on the way that ELPA is used today. ELPA is under > our control; we can adjust our process to suit the needs of Emacs development. Yes, but external packages lose much of their value if they aren't developed in a compatible manner. > LI> Emacs doesn't seem to have a massive surfeit of developers, so I wonder > LI> where this plan comes from. > > It comes from the desire to decouple the development of large, mostly external > projects, from core Emacs. They don't belong in Emacs.git. But you're talking about coupling ELPA tighter with core Emacs, too. "They don't belong" isn't really much of an argument here. The question is: What is the most effective way for Emacs developers to spend their time? I can't really see that anybody has made the case that shifting stuff from Emacs core to ELPA will mean less work for... well, anybody. (Except perhaps CEDET. There seems to be a lot of merging problems there.) -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no