> From: Philip Kaludercic <philipk@posteo.net> > Cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2022 16:58:51 +0000 > > Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes: > > >> >> > And if you think many do, why not clone the repository directly into > >> >> > ~/.emacs.d/elpa/? > >> >> > >> >> Because that won't take care of scraping for autoloads, byte > >> >> compilation and installing missing dependencies. > >> > > >> > I don't see why. Please elaborate how having the repository inside > >> > ~/.emacs.d gets in the way of these activities. > >> > >> It doesn't get in the way, the issue just is that if you were to just > >> clone a package right into .emacs.d, you would still have to do all > >> these steps individually and manually. > > > > Which steps are those, and why do we have to do it manually? > > Let us assume `default-directory' is (locate-user-emacs-file "elpa"). > If I run "M-! git clone https://some.git.host.com/path/to/repo/foo.git";, > then I'll just have a directory called "foo", right? If I want to byte > compile the files I'd e.g. have to open foo in Dired, mark all Emacs > Lisp files, byte compile them, then run something like > `make-directory-autoloads' myself. Then I'd have to find the main file, > check the dependency list and run M-x package-install on every one that > is missing, again one-by-one. > > You don't have to do this for `package-install', because it invokes > `package-unpack' that takes care of those details. As > package-vc-install doesn't use prepared tarballs, the equivalent process > is a bit different (thus we have `package-vc-unpack'), but the intention > is the same. Bundle all the repetitive task into a single command. OK, but my question was why all of this gets magically done when you clone the repository outside ~/.emacs.d/elpa, but does not get done when you clone it inside? I thought this is what you were alluding to when I asked why not clone into ~/.emacs.d. > > (if (fboundp 'normal-top-level-add-subdirs-to-load-path) > > (normal-top-level-add-subdirs-to-load-path)) > > > > Example of directories which need this is the site-lisp directory. > > I was not familiar with this function. > > > Why cannot we do something like this in this case? > > I would have to try this out, but my worry is that in some cases this > could add too many non-lisp directories. The function can be easily extended to only add directories in which we have *.el files. > It still seems more elegant to encode what the lisp directory is in the > package description. You consider manual configuration of a package to be more elegant than automatically finding the directories to put on load-path?
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