Payas Relekar <relekarpayas@gmail.com> writes: > Philip Kaludercic <philipk@posteo.net> writes: > >>>> 1. Get use-package in ELPA >>>> 2. Complete all documentation >>>> 3. Prepare documentation in texinfo >>>> Will cross that bridge when 2 is done. >> >> While we are at it, is there a rationale for this order? I mean, there >> is no hurry, right? My misunderstanding was that the order was 2 -> 3 -> >> 1. Or are you planning to have use-package ready for Emacs 29? > > If you mean merging use-package into emacs.git, that will definitely not > be happening (at least if I'm the only one working on it). Ok. > As for the order rationale, getting use-package to ELPA means less > friction and more users can try it out, more feedback, more eyeballs, > basically. What are we trying to find? From what I know use-package is already a very mature package, written by very capable people. I expect most of the changes to be made after use-package.el has been added to the core. > Ultimate aim here is to make use-package to emacs.git, so users have > use-package available without any effort. ELPA is just a step in that > direction. > > 1 -> 2 -> 3 is also how Eglot went about and it worked quite well for it. Yes, but the arrow between points 2 and 3 would have to be pretty long. Eglot was an ELPA package from the very beginning, and I don't know if the documentation was ever as incomplete as it is for use-package right now. The rewrite into Texinfo (which is probably what I had confused) took place just before the package was merged into the core. use-package will now be added to GNU ELPA with _incomplete_ Texinfo documentation. This is my objection. An outdated manual with "TODO"s can be more frustrating than no documentation at all. > From my understanding, ELPA has less stringent requirements for > documentation and testing compared to core. Since I cannot commit enough > time to complete all the tasks before expected 29 branch-off, ELPA is a > good compromise IMO. Most packages on ELPA don't have any special documentation, most don't need any documentation either. Use-package is more complicated,
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4