|
From: | Dmitry Gutov |
Subject: | Re: Imports / inclusion of s.el into Emacs |
Date: | Wed, 3 Jun 2020 15:15:22 +0300 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.8.0 |
On 03.06.2020 07:24, Richard Stallman wrote:
Today I came across a message remaining from May 11 and concluded I had better respond to it. I regret taking so long. > > > Right. And I'll posit that including s.el into GNU ELPA, by itself, will > > > not hurt any of these three goals. > > > > It would mess up the naming in GNU Emacs, making two incongruous > > systems. > Not in GNU Emacs, though. Yes, in GNU Emacs. If we have s.el in GNU ELPA under current conditions, that will put the s- namespace of GNU Emacs outside our control. (Indeed, someone claimed it is already de facto outside our control.)
That "someone" was me as well.
It is a big problem that other people, without even consulting us, can take major parts of the Emacs Lisp namespace away from us. Maybe we can correct this general problem in a general way with a system of namespaces. I hope so. But denying the problem is not solving it.
I agree it's a problem, but my (and not only mine) point was that adding the package to ELPA won't really change anything in this regard.
A namespace system would be a welcome change, of course.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |