Re: Mailcrypt - EMACS package maintainers please read this message.
"Davide G. M. Salvetti" <salve@debian.org> writes:
> Just asking, wouldn't be better to provide a unified interface, where your
> scripts decide if install/add-on-package should be called in foreground or
> background (or, maybe, pass an argument to install/add-on-package
> suggesting what to do)?
Well, I've thought about it, but last time this stuff was discussed,
we didn't really have a concensus about it, and I just wanted to make
sure we got the most important things accomplished.
The only reason we might have trouble adding something like this later
would be if our current policy conflicted with the future change. The
biggest place I'd expect that to be a problem would be in the design
of the arguement lists to the install/remove scripts.
However, we can get around that by supporting the kind of stuff you're
talking about through environment variables, or a little
checker-program, so later (once we decide what's needed, if anything),
people can add something like this to their scripts:
if [ ! -z "${BYTE_COMPILE_BACKGROUND}" ]
then
...
or if we don't like ENV variables:
BYTE_COMPILE_BACKGROUND=\
"`/usr/lib/emacsen-common/check-emacs-policy --byte-compile-background`"
which I like less, but could also work.
I guess what I'm saying is that *my* feeling is that we've made most
of the changes where I think we have a clear idea of what the needs
are, and it doesnt' look like we've done anything that will preclude
doing the things that we see we might need in the future. So we
should let these changes settle in a bit, during which time it should
become clear what should be added next.
Of course, I could be wrong :>
--
Rob Browning <rlb@cs.utexas.edu>
PGP fingerprint = E8 0E 0D 04 F5 21 A0 94 53 2B 97 F5 D6 4E 39 30
Reply to: