> From: Philip Kaludercic <philipk@posteo.net> > Cc: John Wiegley <johnw@gnu.org>, Payas Relekar <relekarpayas@gmail.com>, > Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>, emacs-devel > <emacs-devel@gnu.org> > Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2022 07:07:47 +0000 > > Stefan Kangas <stefankangas@gmail.com> writes: > > >> I'm entirely in support of the code and its development moving directly > >> into > >> core. Whichever best supports the Emacs developers and the needs of the > >> community, since it is more than likely that future work will be carried > >> out > >> by others. I'm ready to hand it off in whatever way is desired by the team > >> here. > > > > IMHO, for that to make sense, someone capable would have to volunteer to > > maintain it on our side. If we don't have such a volunteer, it makes > > more sense to me to keep development external for now. > > > > If we see a need to move development fully into core in the future, we > > can always do that, but the reverse is harder. > > I agree, a transitory stage where use-package is still maintained > externally sounds like the safer bet for now. I don't share Stefan's fears. If the only issue with moving use-package to core is that someone must step forward to take the responsibility for maintaining it, I think we can move it into core without fear. I see no reason for making a dedicated maintainer for use-package a prerequisite for importing it, given what John says about its stability. It's a non-issue.
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