Re: [Emacs-diffs] feature/integrated-elpa 4f6df43 15/23: README added

[Phillip Lord]

John Wiegley <address@hidden> writes:

>>>>>> "PL" == Phillip Lord <address@hidden> writes:
>
> PL> If we are moving files into the current directory structure, I'm not sure
> PL> we need package.el at all. It would be doing something totally different
> PL> from what it does at the moment (which is select, download, install and
> PL> initialize packages).
>
> Then let's not involve package.el at the beginning of this effort. It's
> apparently creating much more confusion than is necessary.


I would not agree with this; at a code level, it's made things very
simple. There is a one-to-one mapping between files in ELPA and where
they reside in the Emacs build, and there are several easy ways to get
the files from ELPA into the build, including pre-existing git based
tools which may make development very convienient. As a nice side effect
it also lets me build and test all packages in an ELPA checkout from
inside an Emacs build, which would be a useful thing to be able to do.

So far, the main objection has been to the use of a new top-level
directory (which I've can and will move -- it's not necessary to have
top-level, although I still think its nicer).

My own feeling is that for an emacs-devel discussion, it was quite low
on the confusion stakes.

Phil