Re: package and testing rant (was Re: package.el, auto-installation, and auto-removal)

[Nic Ferrier]

Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:

> Please let's not forget that most users of ELPA are not developers,
> they are users.  For a user, it's an annoyance when fetching a package
> requires to "build" it, especially if that "build" stage requires
> extra tools (beyond Emacs itself) and other dependencies, let alone
> dealing with possible error messages, failure to build, etc.

No one is arguing for that. I am NOT arguing for that.

Build is something package authors SHOULD do.

Build is something package authors for elpa.git do not do currently and
that inconveniences users in the end because authors won't test and the
packages will be broken. This happens often now with MELPA.


> Sacrificing user convenience of installing a package to make our lives
> as developers easier sounds backwards to me.  So, from my POV, the
> ideal should be "no build stage", and the only files to be generated
> during the installation should be those that Emacs can do itself, as
> part of the fetching and installation.

No one is saying that.