Ihor Radchenko <yanta...@posteo.net> writes: > Having dir locals file in the tarball can be useful for the users who > wish to edit Org mode's source code. We set a number of editing defaults > there that are employed across Org codebase. These defaults make our > life easier when users create patches by directly modifying Org mode code > they got via ELPA.
I thought including .dir-locals.el may be a mistake because there are only 4 packages (auctex, el-get, helm and org) among all packages in GNU(-devel) ELPA and MELPA generating native compilation error about .dir-locals.el in NixOS. Now I know that including .dir-locals.el in org is not a mistake. Instead, it is intended. I will change our code in NixOS to not compile .dir-locals.el. The no-byte-compile cookie Morgan mentions is very interesting. There may be more packages including a .dir-locals.el file in their release tarballs but not generating error in NixOS because their .dir-locals.el has this cookie set. add-dir-local-variable adds this cookie only since Emacs 29[1] so older .dir-locals.el does not have this cookie. I think adding it to .dir-locals.el of org is a good idea. [1]: 6539eb05889c783d782f114d9c072208d3080561
