From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Lambda Coder Subject: Re: Remove Org from Emacs repository? Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2016 11:08:23 -0800 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=001a114809fa574f230543f389da Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:36858) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cIgpX-0000cV-Rz for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 18 Dec 2016 14:09:09 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cIgpW-0000QX-5Z for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 18 Dec 2016 14:09:07 -0500 Received: from mail-ua0-x241.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400c:c08::241]:35117) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cIgpV-0000Pn-VV for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 18 Dec 2016 14:09:06 -0500 Received: by mail-ua0-x241.google.com with SMTP id 50so9589289uae.2 for ; Sun, 18 Dec 2016 11:09:04 -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: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org --001a114809fa574f230543f389da Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 +1 (keep it in) On Sun, Dec 18, 2016 at 10:46 AM, Xebar Saram 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 > 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 >> >> >> >> >> > --001a114809fa574f230543f389da Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
+1 (keep it in)

On Sun, Dec 18, 2016 at 10:46 AM, Xebar Saram <zeltak= c@gmail.com> wrote:
+1 for keeping it in

i often debug my org base= d 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.

(=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
>>




--001a114809fa574f230543f389da--