Re: Easy configuration of a site-lisp directory

[No Wayman]

dick <dick.r.chiang@gmail.com> writes:

> Ah, the craven pleasure of having one's flamebait reach its 
> target via the
> intertubes.
>
> Like the straight author, I also prefer a Halstedian approach to
> garbage code, but elpa-admin is not that, and maintaining a 
> Heroku mirror to
> normalize relations with ELPA is as cost-effective as erecting a 
> Trumpian
> border wall.  I suppose, relative to that undertaking, having to 
> replicate
> elpa-admin's pre-build treatment and default-inclusive recipe 
> were but
> afterthoughts. [1]

> Ever unconvincingly trying to appear aloof, I'll add the 
> requisite disclaimer
> that none of these decisions actually matters except to a 
> hundred or so
> obsessives.  Most emacsers' configurations are so flawed that 
> nothing we do
> prevents them from having to issue shell commands to manage 
> third-party
> elisp.
>
> [1]
> https://github.com/raxod502/straight.el/blob/08b0ecf525b4b53e0952c1575644f82f52264961/straight.el#L3059-L3122


So you take issue with the Org specific code I mentioned earlier?
Again, this is almost exactly what Org does in its makefile.
I'm not sure what qualifies that as 'gnarly', or even what you 
mean by 'gnarly' in that context.
At one point straight.el ignored this step altogether and provided 
a hack to work around it.
I considered that to be a worse solution than implementing general 
pre-build commands, especially
considering Org is not the only popular package to require such 
treatment (see mu4e, magit, etc).

Writing in a flowery, over-the-top manner isn't a substitute for 
substance.
If you have any concrete technical criticisms, I'm open to hearing 
them.
Still waiting to hear how el-paso deals with the issue of packages 
with similar requirements, too.

However, this conversation has strayed from the original topic and 
doesn't belong on emacs-devel.
As such, this is the last reply I'll make to this thread.
Feel free to email me directly or open an issue at straight's 
repo.