>> E.g. I can't see a clean way to install `git-commit` directly from its
>> VCS (i.e. recognized by `package-activate-all` and running from the Git
>> clone) without either forcing the install of `magit` at the same
>> time(&place) and/or having side-effects like sometimes shadowing another
>> installation of `magit`.
[...]
> This is an unusual, and in a sense extreme, example.
FWIW, I have no idea whether it's usual or not and what's its history.
> Prescient is a much more typical example,
I don't know in which way the situation is different for Prescient.
> git-commit/magit also has an unpleasant backstory. I can tell you about
> that in a private message. All I'll say here is that I did not actually
> want to add git-commit to magit but the behavior of its author forced me
> to accept the offer to take over as maintainer. At the time it seemed
> best to do that by adding it to the magit repository.
But that makes no difference to the problem at hand: by being in the
same directory as the other `magit` files, you can't add it to
`load-path` without adding those other files as well.
> On the other hand, I have some doubts this is actually going to benefit
> anyone. Is there anyone out there who does use git-commit but not magit?
This cuts both ways: if they're always installed in pair, why not keep
them as a single package?
Stefan
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