[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Reconsider defaults for use-package-vc-prefer-newest
From: |
Philip Kaludercic |
Subject: |
Re: Reconsider defaults for use-package-vc-prefer-newest |
Date: |
Wed, 25 Sep 2024 20:11:20 +0000 |
Suhail Singh <suhailsingh247@gmail.com> writes:
> Philip Kaludercic <philipk@posteo.net> writes:
>
>> The idea is to add a "COMMIT MISMATCH" warning whenever we detect that
>> two packages have different commits.
>
> Which are the two packages being considered?
IIRC the local package you have installed, the package on NonGNU ELPA,
the package on MELPA Stable and the package on MELPA Unstable.
> From my perspective, the following is the desired behaviour: whenever
> package.el has evidence that the same purported package version is being
> served via different commits in the various remote archives (that the
> user has enabled) the user is made aware. If the package versions
> aren't the same, then no "COMMIT MISMATCH" should be shown.
Yeah, that was my intention as well.
> I.e., the situation of interest is when versions match, but commits
> don't. If it helps, "NON-UNIQUE COMMIT" might be more accurate, but I
> don't have a strong opinion on the wording.
NON-UNIQUE COMMIT seems more vague to me?
>> What this doesn't do yet is eliminate false positives, such as
>> different commits between a local version of a package and a remote
>> version. I guess we are only interested in differences between remote
>> packages, right?
>
> If the package is a local :vc checkout, I don't have strong opinions on
> whether it is considered or ignored. If the package is an installed
> version (via package-install), then it should be compared against any
> other version that has the same version number (i.e., in the same manner
> as a remote package would be compared).
We don't track multiple version numbers by default, but only the package
as announced by a package archive. And VC packages seem like a bit of
an headache in this case, as
>> Does MELPA annotate their packages with commits?
>
> Both MELPA and MELPA Stable seem to. I am basing this on the assumption
> that the result of button-describe comes from the archive in question.
> If there is a better way to confirm, please do let me know.
I could have checked that as well myself, basically I just had to load
https://melpa.org/packages/archive-contents
and then one sees that each package description has a :commit entry.
>> + (if (and (not (package-desc-dir opkg))
>> + (equal ocommit commit))
>> + "" ", COMMIT MISMATCH!")))))
>
> If (package-desc-dir opkg) evaluates to non-nil, then the above
> evaluates to ", COMMIT MISMATCH!" which seems incorrect.
Right, I'll try to test this myself before sending you more patches ^^
>> It is documented on the elpa-admin branch:
>>
>> https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs/elpa.git/tree/README?h=elpa-admin&id=9bd65395f1d4875915731ddbdd73a471f10d7794#n215
>
> Thanks for sharing the reference, but why is this not in the default
> branch (which is the only one linked from <https://elpa.gnu.org/>) to
> begin with? Alternatively, if the elpa-admin variant is considered the
> canonical version, why doesn't the link from <https://elpa.gnu.org/>
> point to
> <https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs/elpa.git/plain/README?h=elpa-admin>
> instead?
No reason really, I'll try to update it soon.
> The comment at the top of the file states that the two versions "differ
> slightly". However, differences in the documentation of supported
> options (regardless of whether or not their use is encouraged) is not
> what I would consider a "slight" difference.
>
>> That being said, I still think that this is a feature that we would want
>> to advise package maintainers not to use.
>
> Agreed.
--
Philip Kaludercic on siskin
- Re: Reconsider defaults for use-package-vc-prefer-newest, (continued)
- Re: Reconsider defaults for use-package-vc-prefer-newest, Philip Kaludercic, 2024/09/21
- Re: Reconsider defaults for use-package-vc-prefer-newest, Suhail Singh, 2024/09/22
- Re: Reconsider defaults for use-package-vc-prefer-newest, Philip Kaludercic, 2024/09/22
- Re: Reconsider defaults for use-package-vc-prefer-newest, Suhail Singh, 2024/09/22
- Re: Reconsider defaults for use-package-vc-prefer-newest, Philip Kaludercic, 2024/09/25
- Re: Reconsider defaults for use-package-vc-prefer-newest, Suhail Singh, 2024/09/25
- Re: Reconsider defaults for use-package-vc-prefer-newest,
Philip Kaludercic <=
- Re: Reconsider defaults for use-package-vc-prefer-newest, Suhail Singh, 2024/09/26
- Re: Reconsider defaults for use-package-vc-prefer-newest, Richard Stallman, 2024/09/28
- Re: Reconsider defaults for use-package-vc-prefer-newest, Philip Kaludercic, 2024/09/29
- Re: Reconsider defaults for use-package-vc-prefer-newest, Suhail Singh, 2024/09/29
- Re: Reconsider defaults for use-package-vc-prefer-newest, Suhail Singh, 2024/09/25
- Re: Reconsider defaults for use-package-vc-prefer-newest, Philip Kaludercic, 2024/09/25
- Re: Reconsider defaults for use-package-vc-prefer-newest, Charles Choi, 2024/09/26
- Re: Reconsider defaults for use-package-vc-prefer-newest, Adam Porter, 2024/09/26
- Re: Reconsider defaults for use-package-vc-prefer-newest, Suhail Singh, 2024/09/27
- Re: Reconsider defaults for use-package-vc-prefer-newest, Eli Zaretskii, 2024/09/27