Re: Emacs Package Management

[Paul R]

Hello Stephen,

Stephen> There's another possible use: to enable the distribution of
Stephen> a "lightweight" Emacs, removing a lot of packages that are
Stephen> currently bundled but providing an easy way to get and
Stephen> install them. This was not my initial motivation, but I can
Stephen> see some utility in that approach. In this case, it's obvious
Stephen> that the packages should conform to whatever standards the
Stephen> FSF wants to enforce.

We have a lot to learn from existing systems. The first I can think of
is the Debian distribution, because it has a strong policy about what
criteria packages must meet to enter in a repository or an other.
Also, only some of Debian repositories are activated in default
distribution. Please note I'm not judging the nature of this policy,
I'm only observing that Debian has very similar needs and seems to
handle them well, since a long time.
Although I'm not sure, I think I read here some posts from a person
involved in the Debian GNUemacs (and emacs extensions) packaging. He
probably has a lot to say in this area.


-- 
  Paul