Re: why is site-lisp placed before the default load path?
From:
Robert Weiner
Subject:
Re: why is site-lisp placed before the default load path?
Date:
Tue, 2 Aug 2016 14:35:59 -0400
On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 1:35 PM, James Cloos <address@hidden> wrote:
That is what broke things. (As I've complained before.)
If a package unintentionally shadows/overrides a standard/core Emacs library, then it is the package that is broken and needs to be fixed. If instead the behavior is intentional then that is what the current load-path order is designed to allow.