Re: A proposal for removing obsolete packages

[Andrew Hyatt]

Richard Stallman <address@hidden> writes:

> [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
> [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
> [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]
>
>   > For example, a package that is declared obsolete during the development
>   > of Emacs 25 would be moved to obsolete, and a message would be added to
>   > say that "<package> is obsolete and will be removed in Emacs 27". It
>   > couldn't be removed in Emacs 26 because it didn't start Emacs 25 in
>   > obsolete.
>
> I agree.  But we should not be rigit about deleting it in Emacs 27,
> either.  Depending on how the feature is used, we might want to save
> it longer.  Features used in Lisp code may need to remain longer.

Could we instead not move things into obsolete if we didn't think they
were removable?

Also, can you give an example of something that is obsolete but
shouldn't be removed?  That might help me understand your concern.