Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes: > Stefan Kangas [2022-11-20 03:23:09] wrote: >> Philip Kaludercic <philipk@posteo.net> writes: >>>> All of these packages live in the same repository in the link below. >>> >>> Would it be possible to change this? E.g. by making each project live >>> on it's own branch. That would make the :ignored-files rules below a >>> lot simpler. >> >> We could also make the rules simpler by adding support for the inverse >> of :ignored-packages. > > Multi-package repositories are fundamentally incompatible with > `package-vc` (they kind of work, but with various caveats). They will have the same issues as elpa-admin has, right? In that case, the issue will be if someone just wants to install prescient, they will have all the other dependencies unconditionally "installed" along with the rest. At the same time, if someone installs one of the more specialised packages, which adds the same repository as a dependency, you'll have the same package checked out twice, and I would have to guess which takes priority in `load-path'... > So I think we definitely don't want to support them better, but instead > we should discourage them. If we want to invest efforts in that > direction it should be efforts to make it easier to "re-merge" packages > so as to move away from the problem. Agreed.
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