Re: Bug#899221: [medium size project] break up emacs-goodies-el into many elpafied packages
Hello,
On Thu, Jun 14 2018, Nicholas D Steeves wrote:
> 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?
This is not up to any of us, but the Debian maintainer of xemacs. And I
do not believe he has any intention of dropping support.
> 0. Is the Emacsen Team going to maintain all of the new packages?
Yes, but don't forget the Policy requirement that at least one human be
listed in Uploaders.
> If so, can Peter S Galbraith and Julian Gilbey be added to the team
> and to the Uploaders for all these new packages?
Only if they explicitly consent to their addition to each individual
package.
> 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?
> 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?
On both of these issues, we've all already given you our opinions in
previous messages and/or IRC. Since you're doing the work, you get to
decide between those opinions.
> 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?
Seems like an oversight. A transitional package would be useful to
users.
--
Sean Whitton
Reply to: