[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#899221: [medium size project] break up emacs-goodies-el into many elpafied packages



Hi!

Sorry for the delay replying to this thread, I've had a busy week and
won't have time to work on dpkg-dev-el and debian-el until Tuesday the
19th.  Reply follows below.  Please comment on at least four or five
points.

On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 12:33:21PM -0300, David Bremner wrote:
> Sean Whitton <spwhitton@spwhitton.name> writes:
> 
> > Hello,
> >
> > On Sun, Jun 10 2018, David Bremner wrote:
> >
> >> This is pretty much what notmuch does as well (with 1.2.3-2
> >> effectively a point release with selective distribution). The argument
> >> gets a bit circular here. Branches make sense if you think separete
> >> upstream releases on MELPA make sense.
> >
> > It might not be crazy to have MELPA (like Fedora) be a downstream of the
> > native package in the Debian archive.
> 
> Hmm. Well, it wouldn't be my first choice, but I think it's not really
> the most important issue to figure out. For example, are we ready to
> drop xemacs support from dpkg-dev-el and debian-el? If not, then that's
> a problem. OTOH, I also don't want to block the transition to
> unversioned emacs. Or be sucked into the briarpatch of maintaining
> emacs-goodies-el.

I've also been wondering about Debian's xemacs support for a year, and
the position I've formed (which Sean has confirmed) is that as a
general case packages should be transitioned to dh-elpa.  Given the
specific case of unversioned emacs support as a team goal it seems
clear that xemacs support should be dropped at this time.  Has there
yet been an official announcement to users that xemacs is depreciated
in Debian?

Re: briarpatch of src:emacs-goodies-el.

0. Is the Emacsen Team going to maintain all of the new packages?  If
so, can Peter S Galbraith and Julian Gilbey be added to the team and
to the Uploaders for all these new packages?

1. Src:emacs-goodies-el is a native 3.0 package, but includes many
quilt packages.  I think the historical reason for this is that it
allowed the maintainer to manually update a lisp file from a mailing
list, wiki, or forum copy, and then resolve conflicts between hunks of
the patch and the new upstream source.  Also, this preserves
separation between these sources and Debian changes...

It is clear that any bin:emacs-goodies-el component that has a living
upstream should be transitioned to a non-native elpafied package, but
maybe this would be a good time to take advantage of one of the
conveniences of native-packaging for packages that do no have a living
upstream?  eg: We apply the stack of patches to the native package
source.  Conversely, if maintaining a pristine copy of the original
source is more desirable then wouldn't a non-native package be more
appropriate?

2. Src:emacs-goodies-el contains a lot of Debian-provided
documentation and facilities for updating that documentation.  A lot
of the (difficult to automate) work of resolving this bug will be to
split up that documentation and possibly also forward upstream PRs.

3. Is the consensus is that the git history of all the new packages
does not need to be preserved from src:emacs-goodies-el?  In light of
#1, and moving to a bunch of native packages without quilt patches, I
guess the patches should be applied to src:emacs-goodies-el, then the
patch files deleted, and then these changes should be pushed to the
existing repository, and then this repository should be frozen.  This
will allow each of the new src packages to refer to the old git repo
URL.  Agreed?

4. I noticed that emacs-goodies-el has not had a dependency on an
elpafied packages added each time a file is removed.  This seems to
indicate that when this work is completed bin:emacs-goodies-el will
just silently disappear and users will be left without the modes they
are used to having after an upgrade.  Is this intended, or should
emacs-goodies-el become a dummy transitional package?

5. It seems like emacs-goodies-el should be kept around as a dummy
package for the purposes of bug tracking, because I don't think anyone
should be rushed to triage src:emacs-goodies-el's many bug reports.


Cheers,
Nicholas

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: