Re: [ANN] New library stream.el in ELPA

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

John Wiegley writes:

 > Although we have no hard and fast rule yet for what goes into core
 > and ELPA, I expect moving things into core to offer a better reason
 > than "because I want it there". Such a package should provide:
 > 
 >   - a basic functionality we expect to be commonly used,
 >   - supports a package already in core,
 >   - provides some justification for being in the default
 >     distribution and thus subject to maintenance by the core
 >     maintainers.
 > 
 > If it can't answer those questions, it should be in ELPA.

Of course, as Daniel was at pains to point out, there are cases where
"it's just too Hello-Kitty-cute to not be in core" is an answer to all
three (though the connection of cuteness to "supports package" is as
tenuous as the smile on a maintainer's face, I admit ;-).

Not-entirely-tongue-in-cheek-ly y'rs,