Remove Org from Emacs repository?

Remove Org from Emacs repository?

[Reuben Thomas]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 949 bytes --]

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

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1650 bytes --]

Re: Remove Org from Emacs repository?

[aaermolov]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1612 bytes --]

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 <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 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

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 487 bytes --]

Re: Remove Org from Emacs repository?

[Carsten Dominik]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2013 bytes --]

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, <aaermolov@gmail.com> 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 <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 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
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2725 bytes --]

Re: Remove Org from Emacs repository?

[Rasmus]

Carsten Dominik <dominik@uva.nl> writes:

>  So my vote goes toward keeping it in.

1+

-- 
Tack, ni svenska vakttorn. Med plutonium tvingar vi dansken på knä!

Re: Remove Org from Emacs repository?

[Greg Troxel]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 925 bytes --]


Carsten Dominik <dominik@uva.nl> writes:

> 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.

I agree.  Even though I have compiled org from git at times, and have
been using emacs since version 16 or 17 in the late 80s (I am fuzzy on
dates), I have never actually learned the package system.  I also look
at org files using the built-in emacs on mac, and various other places.

So I think emacs should continue to have a stable version of org, but
also that it should be relatively easy to install and use a newer
version from a packaging system.

(It should also be easy to use org from git, but it is; it's just
prepending to load path and I've been doing that with no issues for
years.)


[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 162 bytes --]

Re: Remove Org from Emacs repository?

[Kaushal Modi]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 677 bytes --]

Carsten Dominik <dominik@uva.nl> writes:

>
> > 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.


+1

Even though I build org mode from source, I'd like to keep it packaged with
emacs too. That way, people who do not want to install any package manually
can still reap the benefits of org mode.

Org mode is one of the key features and a very unique one to emacs.
Separating it from emacs would not be good I believe.
-- 

Kaushal Modi

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1311 bytes --]

Re: Remove Org from Emacs repository?

[Reuben Thomas]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1079 bytes --]

On 18 December 2016 at 13:20, Carsten Dominik <dominik@uva.nl> wrote:

> 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.
>

​Since you're responsible for org-mode, and I guess you're happy with the
coordination between (your) upstream and Emacs, then ​I agree it should
continue to be distributed out of the box.

However, your comments raise a couple of thoughts:

1. Is there something hard about packages that could be made easier? For
example, Atom seems to get along fine without many built-in packages, so
that most users expect to install some.

2. Is there any possibility to make org-mode a build-time dependency of
Emacs, like the C libraries that it requires, or is that a silly idea? That
could permit it to be shipped as built-in, without having its source
duplicated in Emacs's repository.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2047 bytes --]

Re: Remove Org from Emacs repository?

[Phillip Lord]

Reuben Thomas <rrt@sc3d.org> writes:

> On 18 December 2016 at 13:20, Carsten Dominik <dominik@uva.nl> wrote:
>
>> 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.
>>
>
> ​Since you're responsible for org-mode, and I guess you're happy with the
> coordination between (your) upstream and Emacs, then ​I agree it should
> continue to be distributed out of the box.
>
> However, your comments raise a couple of thoughts:
>
> 1. Is there something hard about packages that could be made easier? For
> example, Atom seems to get along fine without many built-in packages, so
> that most users expect to install some.
>
> 2. Is there any possibility to make org-mode a build-time dependency of
> Emacs, like the C libraries that it requires, or is that a silly idea? That
> could permit it to be shipped as built-in, without having its source
> duplicated in Emacs's repository.

This kind of idea is, indeed, being actively considered on
emacs-devel. In fact, I managed to get a simple version of this working
using package.el during the build process. The idea would be that
packages in ELPA format could be made available to Emacs during the
build and then be packaged with the tarball as now.

The general feedback on my implementation was negative, but the general
principle is something that people are keen to pursue, hopefully for
Emacs-26. Org-mode would make a good test case for this.

Another possibility would be to extend the current "autoload"
functionality, so that it can install via package.el before
autoloading. Might work, but not tried that yet.


Phil

Re: Remove Org from Emacs repository?

[Reuben Thomas]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 552 bytes --]

On 19 December 2016 at 15:32, Phillip Lord <phillip.lord@russet.org.uk>
wrote:

>
> This kind of idea is, indeed, being actively considered on
> emacs-devel.


​That's good to hear!​

In fact, I managed to get a simple version of this working
> using package.el during the build process. The idea would be that
> packages in ELPA format could be made available to Emacs during the
> build and then be packaged with the tarball as now.
>

​That would be great, it would certainly do what I'm after.​

-- 
http://rrt.sc3d.org

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1381 bytes --]

Re: Remove Org from Emacs repository?

[Christian Moe]

+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, <aaermolov@gmail.com> 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 <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 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
>>

Re: Remove Org from Emacs repository?

[Xebar Saram]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2489 bytes --]

+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 <mail@christianmoe.com>
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, <aaermolov@gmail.com> 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 <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 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
> >>
>
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3615 bytes --]

Re: Remove Org from Emacs repository?

[Lambda Coder]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2672 bytes --]

+1 (keep it in)

On Sun, Dec 18, 2016 at 10:46 AM, Xebar Saram <zeltakc@gmail.com> wrote:

> +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 <mail@christianmoe.com>
> 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, <aaermolov@gmail.com> 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 <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 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
>> >>
>>
>>
>>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4120 bytes --]

Re: Remove Org from Emacs repository?

[Scott Randby]

+1 for Keeping Org in Emacs.

Scott Randby

On 12/18/2016 08:20 AM, Carsten Dominik wrote:
> 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, <aaermolov@gmail.com
> <mailto:aaermolov@gmail.com>> 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 <rrt@sc3d.org <mailto: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 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
> 
> 

Re: Remove Org from Emacs repository?

[Samuel Wales]

auto-mode-alist has more than 200 entries.  we're gonna remove .org?

"you must install org to view this format" is a bit too minimal for my
taste.  :)  sounds like adobe flash.  :)

surely this topic was raised to have a bit of fun seeing all the responses?  :)

-- 
The Kafka Pandemic: http://thekafkapandemic.blogspot.com

The disease DOES progress.  MANY people have died from it.  And
ANYBODY can get it.

Denmark: free Karina Hansen NOW.
  UPDATE 2016-10: home, but not fully free

Re: Remove Org from Emacs repository?

[Reuben Thomas]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1377 bytes --]

On 18 December 2016 at 19:21, Samuel Wales <samologist@gmail.com> wrote:

> auto-mode-alist has more than 200 entries.  we're gonna remove .org?
>

​Org is nearly 90kLOC, or about 6.5% of the total ELisp code currently in
Emacs. It's bigger than CEDET, smaller than GNUS.

It's a project of its own with its own release cadence. It would be good to
make Emacs less of a monolithic entity, which needs lengthy debugging
cycles between releases, and has to choose between being out of date with
various upstreams, or delaying to test integration of big packages.

Now that package.el is mature, there's no need for Emacs to include all
this stuff in its source releases.

What emacs -Q does is a different matter: there's plenty of scope to ship a
variety of packages "out of the box". Various customised Emacs
"distributions" already do this.

"you must install org to view this format" is a bit too minimal for my
> taste.  :)  sounds like adobe flash.  :)
>

​I'm sure plenty of Emacs users never open an Org-mode file. Why​ should
they have to install it?

surely this topic was raised to have a bit of fun seeing all the
> responses?  :)
>

​No, I was just testing the waters to see if a more modern approach to
development and distribution might be popular. Apparently the answer is, at
least, not yet!

-- 
http://rrt.sc3d.org

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2798 bytes --]

Re: Remove Org from Emacs repository?

[MaDhAt2r]

I am for leaving it to the users discretion as to weather or not they
have Org installed. I think if anyone out there wants to open an .org
file, more than likely, they know what it is and how to get it. If not
there is a plethora of information out there to point them in the right
direction.

After all, isn't free software, at least somewhat, about choices? :)


On Dec 18 at 11:32 PM, Reuben Thomas said thus:
> On 18 December 2016 at 19:21, Samuel Wales <samologist@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> auto-mode-alist has more than 200 entries.  we're gonna remove .org?
>>
>
> ​Org is nearly 90kLOC, or about 6.5% of the total ELisp code currently in
> Emacs. It's bigger than CEDET, smaller than GNUS.
>
> It's a project of its own with its own release cadence. It would be good to
> make Emacs less of a monolithic entity, which needs lengthy debugging
> cycles between releases, and has to choose between being out of date with
> various upstreams, or delaying to test integration of big packages.
>
> Now that package.el is mature, there's no need for Emacs to include all
> this stuff in its source releases.
>
> What emacs -Q does is a different matter: there's plenty of scope to ship a
> variety of packages "out of the box". Various customised Emacs
> "distributions" already do this.
>
> "you must install org to view this format" is a bit too minimal for my
>> taste.  :)  sounds like adobe flash.  :)
>>
>
> ​I'm sure plenty of Emacs users never open an Org-mode file. Why​ should
> they have to install it?
>
> surely this topic was raised to have a bit of fun seeing all the
>> responses?  :)
>>
>
> ​No, I was just testing the waters to see if a more modern approach to
> development and distribution might be popular. Apparently the answer is, at
> least, not yet!
>
> -- 
> http://rrt.sc3d.org

Re: Remove Org from Emacs repository?

[Achim Gratz]

Reuben Thomas writes:
> ​Org is nearly 90kLOC, or about 6.5% of the total ELisp code currently in
> Emacs. It's bigger than CEDET, smaller than GNUS.

Within the whole of Emacs, an argument about size doesn't make any sense
at all.  It's also quite arbitrary, as some functionality that comes
with Org could or even should be factored out into their own packages
eventually.

> It's a project of its own with its own release cadence. It would be good to
> make Emacs less of a monolithic entity, which needs lengthy debugging
> cycles between releases, and has to choose between being out of date with
> various upstreams, or delaying to test integration of big packages.

That needs to be discussed with Emacs devs, not Org (or any other
package that fits a similar profile).  And it has been discussed in the
past, with somewhat interesting responses on both sides.

> Now that package.el is mature, there's no need for Emacs to include all
> this stuff in its source releases.

That assertion isn't universally accepted as true.  Org in particular
continues to show how the integration into Emacs as well as some
functionality in package.el itself is still lacking.  True packetization
of Emacs' "built-in" packages is further hindered by the fact that
package.el is currently solely "user-centric" and lacks the usual
facilities for curating package selection at the installation level.

> ​No, I was just testing the waters to see if a more modern approach to
> development and distribution might be popular. Apparently the answer is, at
> least, not yet!

Again, that's ultimately something for GNU Emacs to decide upon.  But it
doesn't come free nor is all the necessary infrastructure in place yet.


Regards,
Achim.
-- 
+<[Q+ Matrix-12 WAVE#46+305 Neuron microQkb Andromeda XTk Blofeld]>+

SD adaptation for Waldorf Blofeld V1.15B11:
http://Synth.Stromeko.net/Downloads.html#WaldorfSDada

Re: Remove Org from Emacs repository?

[Phillip Lord]

Achim Gratz <Stromeko@nexgo.de> writes:
>> Now that package.el is mature, there's no need for Emacs to include all
>> this stuff in its source releases.
>
> That assertion isn't universally accepted as true.  Org in particular
> continues to show how the integration into Emacs as well as some
> functionality in package.el itself is still lacking.  True packetization
> of Emacs' "built-in" packages is further hindered by the fact that
> package.el is currently solely "user-centric" and lacks the usual
> facilities for curating package selection at the installation level.

I think there's only a few problems, actually. package.el initialization
is all or nothing at the moment, and is disabled on emacs -q. Neither of
these would make sense if we wanted in built packages.

It's not strictly necessary, though. The current idea is to not to use
packages but to, essentially, move the lisp of packages in ELPA into
place in the build. package.el need not be involved then.

Phil

Re: Remove Org from Emacs repository?

[Achim Gratz]

Phillip Lord writes:
> I think there's only a few problems, actually. package.el initialization
> is all or nothing at the moment, and is disabled on emacs -q. Neither of
> these would make sense if we wanted in built packages.

My opinion is that unless package.el adds explicit support for
system-level packetization decisions (i.e. for admins or distributions)
it's not going to gain widespread support from that small, but important
set of folks.  Of course the user will then have to be able to override
these like deactivation of packages, installing different versions, etc.
Before long it also needs to be able to cope with different package
archives simultaneously especially when those have incompatible
numbering schemes.

> It's not strictly necessary, though. The current idea is to not to use
> packages but to, essentially, move the lisp of packages in ELPA into
> place in the build. package.el need not be involved then.

Yes I know.  Which is in essence prolonging the current state of affairs
as far as the users are concerned.  If it gets things moving into the
right direction I'll be glad.  I just had hoped for some more general
(some would say radical) solution.


Regards,
Achim.
-- 
+<[Q+ Matrix-12 WAVE#46+305 Neuron microQkb Andromeda XTk Blofeld]>+

Wavetables for the Terratec KOMPLEXER:
http://Synth.Stromeko.net/Downloads.html#KomplexerWaves

Re: Remove Org from Emacs repository?

[Phillip Lord]

Achim Gratz <Stromeko@nexgo.de> writes:

> Phillip Lord writes:
>> I think there's only a few problems, actually. package.el initialization
>> is all or nothing at the moment, and is disabled on emacs -q. Neither of
>> these would make sense if we wanted in built packages.
>
> My opinion is that unless package.el adds explicit support for
> system-level packetization decisions (i.e. for admins or distributions)
> it's not going to gain widespread support from that small, but important
> set of folks.

I think it mostly has this, in the sense that you can add packages into
admin installation locations. Although, this are disabled with emacs -Q.

> Of course the user will then have to be able to override these like
> deactivation of packages, installing different versions, etc.

Different versions you can do. Deactivation at the moment, no, although
I guess you could delete the autoloads.

> Before long it also needs to be able to cope with different package
> archives simultaneously especially when those have incompatible
> numbering schemes.

That one would be a bit harder, although you could add support for
package repositories to add their own numbering scheme by installating a
package.

>
>> It's not strictly necessary, though. The current idea is to not to use
>> packages but to, essentially, move the lisp of packages in ELPA into
>> place in the build. package.el need not be involved then.
>
> Yes I know.  Which is in essence prolonging the current state of affairs
> as far as the users are concerned.  If it gets things moving into the
> right direction I'll be glad.  I just had hoped for some more general
> (some would say radical) solution.

Some did say radical, unfortunately.

Still, you give me encouragement. I may complete my solution after
all. Perhaps combined with a completely repackaged Emacs core.

Phil

Re: Remove Org from Emacs repository?

[Erik Colson]

Reuben Thomas <rrt@sc3d.org> writes:

> ​Org is nearly 90kLOC, or about 6.5% of the total ELisp code currently in
> Emacs. It's bigger than CEDET, smaller than GNUS.

You hit a point here.  GNUS is indeed distributed with Emacs.  However
GNUS is even more integrated as even the repo is integrated with Emacs.
Maybe it would be the way to go to even include ORGMODE repo in Emacs ?

best
-- 
erik colson

Re: Remove Org from Emacs repository?

[Eric Abrahamsen]

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?

I think the fact that this is an issue at all is an indication of a
shortcoming in Emacs' package-management system. I wish package
management happened "invisibly" (ie, (package-initialize) happened all
by itself). Emacs then would come bundled with certain packages -- Org,
Dired, Gnus, Tramp, etc.

If a user were totally unaware of the existence of packages, those
packages would only get updated when Emacs was updated.

If a user were package-savvy, he/she could open up the package manager,
which would provide the option to update those packages, or remove them
altogether. My personal opinion is that Emacs should lean more towards
"batteries included", but offer a slimming option for users who
understand packages.

Right now I apparently have two copies of Org installed -- the Emacs
bundle, and org-plus-contrib from the package repos. Actually, I have a
third: the plain old Org package from the package repos, because I've
installed other packages that require it. (Another gripe: why isn't the
loading of a file containing (provide 'org) enough to tell the package
manager not to install another one?)

And actually a fourth: Org from git. Again, if the package manager were
satisfied by finding a (provide 'org) in my loaded code-base, this might
be the only copy necessary.

All this is just to say, I wish this were an argument we didn't have to
have.

E

Re: Remove Org from Emacs repository?

[Maria Shinoto]

Some thoughts from a beginner:

>> 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?

Beginners are overwhelmed with the options and traps, to do something 
wrong. It is almost impossible to start with Emacs, despite the good 
documentation. This list helped me out in the beginning, and I am glad.

I started using Emacs without deep technological background and without 
any help around. I started using it because of org-mode, and I was _so_ 
happy that org-mode was included.

"All inclusive" packages are the best for beginners. Download, use as is 
and get used to it. After that, one may start with Elisp and packages.

> I think the fact that this is an issue at all is an indication of a
> shortcoming in Emacs' package-management system. I wish package
> management happened "invisibly" (ie, (package-initialize) happened all
> by itself). Emacs then would come bundled with certain packages -- Org,
> Dired, Gnus, Tramp, etc.

The package manager is not difficult as soon as one has got used to 
Emacs. But it is certainly not a good idea to ask people to use it when 
they start trying Emacs. I am collecting my impressions on my way 
getting used to Emacs and would like to write a short list of ideas to 
make the package manager easier to use, if you like.

Best,
Maria

Preventing Org from being installed by elpa (was: Remove Org from Emacs repository?)

[Karl Voit]

* Eric Abrahamsen <eric@ericabrahamsen.net> wrote:
>
> Actually, I have a third: the plain old Org package from the
> package repos, because I've installed other packages that require
> it. (Another gripe: why isn't the loading of a file containing
> (provide 'org) enough to tell the package manager not to install
> another one?)

I got the tipp of creating «~/.emacs.d/elpa/org-30000101/org-pkg.el»
with:
  (define-package "org" "30000101" "Dummy org mode package" 'nil)

And this simulates the fulfilled dependency so that my git version
of Org-mode is the only one installed (besides maybe the default one
from Emacs).

HTH

-- 
mail|git|SVN|photos|postings|SMS|phonecalls|RSS|CSV|XML to Org-mode:
       > get Memacs from https://github.com/novoid/Memacs <

https://github.com/novoid/extract_pdf_annotations_to_orgmode + more on github

Re: Preventing Org from being installed by elpa

[Christian Wittern]

On 12/21/2016 05:07 AM, Karl Voit wrote:
> I got the tipp of creating «~/.emacs.d/elpa/org-30000101/org-pkg.el»
> with:
>   (define-package "org" "30000101" "Dummy org mode package" 'nil)
>
> And this simulates the fulfilled dependency so that my git version
> of Org-mode is the only one installed (besides maybe the default one
> from Emacs).

Hmm, this sounds like what I want.  However, when I try this, Emacs tells me:

(file-error "Cannot open load file" "no such file or directory" 
"/home/<user>/.emacs.d/elpa/org-30000101/org-autoloads")
   load("/home/<user>/.emacs.d/elpa/org-30000101/org-autoloads" nil t)

Is there a way to avoid this?

All the best,

Christian

-- 
Christian Wittern, Kyoto

Re: Preventing Org from being installed by elpa

[Karl Voit]

* Christian Wittern <cwittern@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 12/21/2016 05:07 AM, Karl Voit wrote:
>> I got the tipp of creating «~/.emacs.d/elpa/org-30000101/org-pkg.el»
>> with:
>>   (define-package "org" "30000101" "Dummy org mode package" 'nil)
>>
>> And this simulates the fulfilled dependency so that my git version
>> of Org-mode is the only one installed (besides maybe the default one
>> from Emacs).
>
> Hmm, this sounds like what I want.  However, when I try this, Emacs tells me:
>
> (file-error "Cannot open load file" "no such file or directory" 
> "/home/<user>/.emacs.d/elpa/org-30000101/org-autoloads")
>    load("/home/<user>/.emacs.d/elpa/org-30000101/org-autoloads" nil t)
>
> Is there a way to avoid this?

I'm sorry. 

Usually, I do keep detailed notes on things I do. But when I created
this pseudo-package, I did not write down a detailed howto for my
future me.

But the input for this came from this mailing list. So please search
the archive and you might get the original instructions.

-- 
mail|git|SVN|photos|postings|SMS|phonecalls|RSS|CSV|XML to Org-mode:
       > get Memacs from https://github.com/novoid/Memacs <

https://github.com/novoid/extract_pdf_annotations_to_orgmode + more on github

Re: Preventing Org from being installed by elpa

[Christian Wittern]

On 12/21/2016 10:25 PM, Karl Voit wrote:
> * Christian Wittern <cwittern@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 12/21/2016 05:07 AM, Karl Voit wrote:
>>> I got the tipp of creating «~/.emacs.d/elpa/org-30000101/org-pkg.el»
>>> with:
>>>   (define-package "org" "30000101" "Dummy org mode package" 'nil)
>>>
>>> And this simulates the fulfilled dependency so that my git version
>>> of Org-mode is the only one installed (besides maybe the default one
>>> from Emacs).
>>
>> Hmm, this sounds like what I want.  However, when I try this, Emacs tells me:
>>
>> (file-error "Cannot open load file" "no such file or directory"
>> "/home/<user>/.emacs.d/elpa/org-30000101/org-autoloads")
>>    load("/home/<user>/.emacs.d/elpa/org-30000101/org-autoloads" nil t)
>>
>> Is there a way to avoid this?
>
> I'm sorry.
>
> Usually, I do keep detailed notes on things I do. But when I created
> this pseudo-package, I did not write down a detailed howto for my
> future me.
>
> But the input for this came from this mailing list. So please search
> the archive and you might get the original instructions.
>
OK, I found the source in this message by Alan Schmitt, to which you replied:

<quote>
On 2016-01-28 12:33, Karl Voit <devnull@Karl-Voit.at> writes:

 >> I’ve had issues with this in the past (I also use org for git). To
 >> make sure org is never installed with elpa, I manually install
 >> (`package-install-file') this org.el file:
 >>
 >> #+begin_src emacs-lisp
 >> ;;; org.el --- Dummy org mode package
 >>
 >> ;; Copyright (C) 2014 Alan Schmitt
 >>
 >> ;; Version: 30000101
 >>
 >> ()
 >>
 >> ;;; org.el ends here
 >> #+end_src
 >
 > There is no "(provide 'org)" or so?

I have not found it necessary. I make sure I load org before
initializing packages, and everything works.

Alan
</quote>

Using this recipe, I get also a file org-autoloads.el produced by package.el 
and everything seems to work.

Cheers,

Christian



-- 
Christian Wittern, Kyoto

Re: Preventing Org from being installed by elpa

[Phillip Lord]

Karl Voit <devnull@Karl-Voit.at> writes:

> * Eric Abrahamsen <eric@ericabrahamsen.net> wrote:
>>
>> Actually, I have a third: the plain old Org package from the
>> package repos, because I've installed other packages that require
>> it. (Another gripe: why isn't the loading of a file containing
>> (provide 'org) enough to tell the package manager not to install
>> another one?)
>
> I got the tipp of creating «~/.emacs.d/elpa/org-30000101/org-pkg.el»
> with:
>   (define-package "org" "30000101" "Dummy org mode package" 'nil)
>
> And this simulates the fulfilled dependency so that my git version
> of Org-mode is the only one installed (besides maybe the default one
> from Emacs).


You could probably do something with package-pinned-packages also.

This is probably something that package.el should support, so when not
submit a bug report?

Re: Preventing Org from being installed by elpa

[Karl Voit]

* Phillip Lord <phillip.lord@russet.org.uk> wrote:
> Karl Voit <devnull@Karl-Voit.at> writes:
>
>> I got the tipp of creating «~/.emacs.d/elpa/org-30000101/org-pkg.el»
>> with:
>>   (define-package "org" "30000101" "Dummy org mode package" 'nil)
>
>
> You could probably do something with package-pinned-packages also.

Hm.

I'm not an expert in package.el or package managers in general but
isn't "pinning" something different? I thought that pinning is
"install a package and prevent it from being updated".

Whereas I want to avoid a package to be installed in the first
place.

-- 
mail|git|SVN|photos|postings|SMS|phonecalls|RSS|CSV|XML to Org-mode:
       > get Memacs from https://github.com/novoid/Memacs <

https://github.com/novoid/extract_pdf_annotations_to_orgmode + more on github

Re: Preventing Org from being installed by elpa

[Phillip Lord]

Karl Voit <devnull@Karl-Voit.at> writes:

> * Phillip Lord <phillip.lord@russet.org.uk> wrote:
>> Karl Voit <devnull@Karl-Voit.at> writes:
>>
>>> I got the tipp of creating «~/.emacs.d/elpa/org-30000101/org-pkg.el»
>>> with:
>>>   (define-package "org" "30000101" "Dummy org mode package" 'nil)
>>
>>
>> You could probably do something with package-pinned-packages also.
>
> Hm.
>
> I'm not an expert in package.el or package managers in general but
> isn't "pinning" something different? I thought that pinning is
> "install a package and prevent it from being updated".
>
> Whereas I want to avoid a package to be installed in the first
> place.


Pinning is to say "I want this package to come from this place". In this
case, you want to say "I want this package to come from the file
system". It seems a related issue.

It's not going to happen unless someone codes it or reports it, though.

Phil