Re: proposal to (maybe) use "elpa-" package prefix for emacs lisp packages
Josh Triplett <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Great to eliminate another class of maintainer scripts in favor of
> something declarative. Does this require triggers, or no action at all
> at installation time?
for the current source-only-version, no action at install time, and no
startup files installed in /etc/
> Could this system support byte-compilation in the future?
If nothing else, it could use the existing emacsen-common setup with a
bit more effort (elpa packages need to know the actual emacs upstream
version e.g. 24.5, not not just the "flavour" emacs24).
> For that matter, is there any fundamental reason that byte-compilation
> couldn't occur at package build time on the buildds, rather than at
> installation time?
There are two related issues: supporting multiple incompatible
co-installed versions of (x)emacs, and dealing with upgrades. I think the
former is the main hurdle: new versions of GNU emacs are _supposed_ to
run old versions (the other direction definitely doesn't hold:
e.g. emacs24 compiled byte code won't run on emacs23).