Re: [Emacs-diffs] feature/integrated-elpa 4f6df43 15/23: README added

[Phillip Lord]

John Wiegley <address@hidden> writes:

>>>>>> "PL" == Phillip Lord <address@hidden> writes:
>
>>> I hadn't thought of package.el and core packages.  What would the value be?
>
> PL>  1) Neatness -- package.el format puts all the files that provide one
> PL> piece of functionality in one place.
>
> Are you suggesting a reorganization of the source code under lisp/?

It's all documented in the readme on the branch.

I'm suggesting supplementing the core build with a directory called
"packages" which support package.el format packages. I can see no
compelling argument for rewriting the lisp directory in a single go. If
we have a packages directory working well, it might make sense for
individual packages.


> PL>  2) Familiarity -- most Emacs-lisp developers are familiar with package.el
> PL> format. Tools like Cask and elpakit work with it.
>
> Why would anyone be rebuilding core libraries?  Or are you proposing this for
> the Emacs developers?

Non core developers who become core developers, bringing their packages
with them.


> PL>  3) Sharing -- if they are in the same format, packages can easily be kept
> PL> on ELPA and in core, and there is a clean migration path.
>
> This part I understand, as applying to the concept of "core ELPA" (which, once
> I have some time next week, I will continue to discuss in our other thread).

Will look forward to it.

Phil