Re: distribution of AUCTeX and built-in TeX/LaTeX modes

[Jeremy Bryant]

Arash Esbati <arash@gnu.org> writes:

> Jeremy Bryant <jb@jeremybryant.net> writes:
>
>> There are however at least 2 scenarios where there are benefits to
>> having auctex, a functional albeit perhaps not the most recent version,
>> in a distribution of Emacs.
>>
>> 1.
>> New LaTeX users can discover and try auctex straightaway.  If they
>> want to upgrade, they also can.  (e.g. case of org-mode)
>
> One obstacle was that AUCTeX took over the hook names of the built-in
> mode, so putting AUCTeX into core wasn't feasible until now, at least
> this was my understanding.  FWIW, this is resolved with v14.x,

Great, this seems to be a major obstacle removed!

>
>> 2.
>> Some sites don't allow downloading of packages (for policy or security
>> reasons), so all users have access to is whatever is included in their
>> Emacs distribution (and indeed their system distro).  (e.g. some
>> corporate environments.)
>
> You can still download the tarball form ELPA and do
> 'M-x package-install-file RET':
>
> ,----[ C-h f package-install-file RET ]
> | package-install-file is an autoloaded interactive subr-native-elisp in
> | ‘package.el’.
> | 
> | (package-install-file FILE)
> | 
> | Install a package from FILE.
> | The file can either be a tar file, an Emacs Lisp file, or a
> | directory.
> | 
> |   Probably introduced at or before Emacs version 25.1.
> | 
> `----
>

Again, this only works if users are provided with general network
access.  Depending on site policy, this is sometimes not permitted,
hence my original question.


>> Perhaps this is a question I'll bring up on emac-devel, I was just
>> wondering if there was any perspective from auctex developers.
>> Thoughts welcome.
>
> Putting AUCTeX into core was one of project targets[1], I can't tell where
> it currently stands on the list.
>
> Best, Arash
>
> Footnotes:
> [1]  https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/auctex.git/tree/RELEASE#n79

Good to know.  I agree this is a worthy goal.

Was the main blocker checking on FSF copyright assignment?  Or was it
the hooks renaming as above?