Re: Updating the "ELPA Protocol"

[Stefan Monnier]

>>> One issue I have been told is the issue of renaming a package, so that
>>> package.el can transparently handle the rename.  That appears to not be
>>> supported.

I think we'd need more details and concrete examples to judge how best
handle such renamings.  The problem I see is that in Emacs, names are
very visible: the package name almost inevitably affect the ELisp
files's names, which themselves affect the functions and vars defined
therein.

For that reason handling the renaming only in ELPA is rarely sufficient.
And also for that reason, renamings are rare.

>> How about using something like Debian's transitional packages, where you
>> replace the old package with an empty package that just depends on the
>> new package?  Would that work?
> It might, but then the user is required to remove the old package and
> select the new one, right?

Compared to all the adjustments they may need to do do their config,
I suspect this is rather minor (and as the other Stefan mentions, it's
not indispensable).


        Stefan