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

[Phillip Lord]

Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:

>> From: address@hidden (Phillip Lord)
>> Cc: John Wiegley <address@hidden>,  address@hidden,  address@hidden,  
>> address@hidden
>> Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2016 09:25:13 +0100
>> 
>> >> I think we should *not* give up the standard file structure. At least not 
>> >> now.
>> >> Using ELPA should feel "first class" for those authors contributing 
>> >> packages
>> >> that are to become part of the standard distribution.
>> >
>> > 100% agreement.
>> 
>> Can you tell me why, though? Drew complained about grepability. What are
>> the other reasons?
>
> The structure of the Emacs lisp/ directory is well-thought and exists
> for many years with only minor changes.  It has some underlying logic,
> which allows one in most cases to know where a certain package lives.
> This is important not just for grepping, but also for visiting the
> files and any operation that requires its full file name.  Having some
> files outside of this structure will make working with those files
> more annoying.

The lisp directory structure is, to my mind, pretty confused. We have
"emacs-lisp", but one of emacs-lisp's more distinctive features, custom,
is not in it. Likewise, tree-widget. We have "emacs-lisp", "progmodes"
and so on which are defined after function, and "obsolete" which is
defined after status. We have "text-modes" and "org". We have "mail" and
"gnus" (although some of gnus is in net). Likewise mh. Likewise
international, language and leim.

Still, I agree that changing things is always a pain.

Phil