Re: [AUCTeX-devel] Updating the GNU ELPA package of AucTeX
Stefan Monnier writes: >> I've hoped that with the new Git ELPA, we could just checkout the >> savannah auctex repository as submodule, and then add some hacks to the >> makefiles to produce tarballs suitable for ELPA. Won't work, no? > > No, because: > >I'd very much prefer not having to run code from >the package itself. > > so I can't just run your makefile rule(s). Ok, I see. >>> So, the real problems are: >>> * Preview subdir: >>> I see two clean and easy ways to deal with: >>> - Split it (again) from AucTeX. >> I'd prefer to keep it in auctex. > > Good. > >>> - "mv preview/* ./; rmdir preview" >> I could live with that. But why is a subdirectory a problem in the >> first place? > > Because of the extra complexity in the build procedure. Remember: > it's very simplistic. How about simply omitting preview from the auctex elpa package (at least for now)? Maybe (later) we could have a separate preview-latex elpa package more or less by creating a symlink packages/preview-latex -> packages/auctex/preview and running the very simplistic build procedure in the former? >>> * The .dtx files: >>> Here, building the .sty during construction of the ELPA package is >>> not really an option. >> No LaTeX installed on the machine, or what's the matter? > > Same as "make": automatically running TeX code from random > contributors is too risky for my taste. But of course, TeX is not > installed on the machine either. By omitting preview, that would be solved, too. Bye, Tassilo ___ auctex-devel mailing list auctex-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/auctex-devel
Re: [AUCTeX-devel] Updating the GNU ELPA package of AucTeX
Tassilo Horn writes: > Stefan Monnier writes: > >>> I've hoped that with the new Git ELPA, we could just checkout the >>> savannah auctex repository as submodule, and then add some hacks to the >>> makefiles to produce tarballs suitable for ELPA. Won't work, no? >> >> No, because: >> >>I'd very much prefer not having to run code from >>the package itself. >> >> so I can't just run your makefile rule(s). > > Ok, I see. It is not clear to me why the act of importing a runnable version of AUCTeX into ELPA should be precluded from running a Makefile rule. It is not like ELPA can directly access git repositories and extract whatever it wants, so the import will always involve explicit steps. > By omitting preview, that would be solved, too. preview-latex is an integral part of AUCTeX by now. That involved moving files, dependencies, combining documentation and so on. Ripping it out of ELPA is not just going to be work, but is also not extremely likely to make people happy. -- David Kastrup ___ auctex-devel mailing list auctex-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/auctex-devel
Re: [AUCTeX-devel] Updating the GNU ELPA package of AucTeX
David Kastrup writes: >>> No, because: >>> >>>I'd very much prefer not having to run code from >>>the package itself. >>> >>> so I can't just run your makefile rule(s). >> >> Ok, I see. > > It is not clear to me why the act of importing a runnable version of > AUCTeX into ELPA should be precluded from running a Makefile rule. It > is not like ELPA can directly access git repositories and extract > whatever it wants, so the import will always involve explicit steps. The new Git ELPA could have the savannah auctex repository as a submodule, so there wouldn't be two individual auctex repositories that need to me synchronized manually. >> By omitting preview, that would be solved, too. > > preview-latex is an integral part of AUCTeX by now. That involved > moving files, dependencies, combining documentation and so on. > Ripping it out of ELPA is not just going to be work, but is also not > extremely likely to make people happy. Stefan said that the additional auctex/preview/ directory was a problem for the ELPA build procedure, so I suggested to have the ELPA auctex package not contain it (the directory would still exist in the ELPA auctex git submodule). Then we could possibly have a separate preview-latex ELPA package by just symlinking packages/preview-latex to packages/auctex/preview/. So I actually don't propose to rip preview out of auctex, just to split it into two ELPA packages in order to cope with the simplistic ELPA build procedure. That said, I'm just trying to propose ideas without knowing about feasibility. I'm really far from an expert in how ELPA packages are build, and neither do I know too much about auctex's build procedure. So David (and Ralf), it would be great if you could jump in here. We definitively want to have current auctex ELPA packages which requires having a copy of the auctex code in the ELPA repository and building it with ELPA's simplistic build procedure. But at the same time, the auctex savannah repository and the auctex directory in ELPA shouldn't be completely separate (possibly even with different directory structures) so that synchronization becomes a nightmare. Bye, Tassilo ___ auctex-devel mailing list auctex-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/auctex-devel
Re: [AUCTeX-devel] Updating the GNU ELPA package of AucTeX
>> It is not clear to me why the act of importing a runnable version of >> AUCTeX into ELPA should be precluded from running a Makefile rule. It >> is not like ELPA can directly access git repositories and extract >> whatever it wants, so the import will always involve explicit steps. Yes, GNU ELPA can and does "git pull" every day as part of its automatic procedure. > The new Git ELPA could have the savannah auctex repository as a > submodule, so there wouldn't be two individual auctex repositories that > need to me synchronized manually. That's the intention, indeed (tho not technically as a Git submodule, but morally equivalent). >>> By omitting preview, that would be solved, too. >> preview-latex is an integral part of AUCTeX by now. I tend to agree with this. I'm not sure of the potential technical/documentation problems, but in terms of user expectation I definitely want preview-latex to be installed when you install auctex. > Stefan said that the additional auctex/preview/ directory was a problem > for the ELPA build procedure, so I suggested to have the ELPA auctex > package not contain it (the directory would still exist in the ELPA > auctex git submodule). Then we could possibly have a separate > preview-latex ELPA package by just symlinking packages/preview-latex to > packages/auctex/preview/. So I actually don't propose to rip preview > out of auctex, just to split it into two ELPA packages in order to cope > with the simplistic ELPA build procedure. I'd be OK with splitting auctex into 2 packages, but does preview-latex work without auctex? If not, that means we'd need to put the dependencies in the "wrong" direction (i.e. users wouldn't automatically get preview-latex when they install auctex). It seems simpler to do the "mv preview/* ./; rmdir preview". Stefan ___ auctex-devel mailing list auctex-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/auctex-devel
Re: [AUCTeX-devel] Updating the GNU ELPA package of AucTeX
Stefan Monnier writes: >>> It is not clear to me why the act of importing a runnable version of >>> AUCTeX into ELPA should be precluded from running a Makefile rule. >>> It is not like ELPA can directly access git repositories and extract >>> whatever it wants, so the import will always involve explicit steps. > > Yes, GNU ELPA can and does "git pull" every day as part of its > automatic procedure. If it expects a package to be in a finished state upon pulling, it means that any standard GNU package (which requires ./configure && make && sudo make install to work) is not supported. The AUCTeX build procedure supports creating an XEmacs package. The XEmacs package is built using a system agnostic configuration which detects most things at runtime (at some cost). Basically you are asking that we throw away all configurability of AUCTeX and convert its repository into an installed tree with a "neutral" configuration. How will its Texinfo files get converted into documentation readable as PDF or info? How will its intro.texi get converted into README by makeinfo? After all, every GNU package should have a README, right? Our current procedures create this README. >> The new Git ELPA could have the savannah auctex repository as a >> submodule, so there wouldn't be two individual auctex repositories >> that need to me synchronized manually. > > That's the intention, indeed (tho not technically as a Git submodule, > but morally equivalent). "Morally equivalent"? You make it sound like you consider the current AUCTeX repository immoral. At any rate, it would be easy enough to create Makefile targets that would export a setup suitable for ELPA. It's not really superbly apropos The "source code" for a work means the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it. "Object code" means any non-source form of a work. [...] The "Corresponding Source" for a work in object code form means all the source code needed to generate, install, and (for an executable work) run the object code and to modify the work, including scripts to control those activities. but of course, once you throw away any other way of configuring the package, what remains is by definition the "preferred form for making modifications" since nothing else exists anymore. > I'd be OK with splitting auctex into 2 packages, but does > preview-latex work without auctex? No. It would be nice to factor out some of its quite sophisticated functionality into something independent from AUCTeX, LaTeX and in fact also TeX, but at the current point of time preview-latex is not independently useful. -- David Kastrup ___ auctex-devel mailing list auctex-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/auctex-devel
Re: [AUCTeX-devel] Updating the GNU ELPA package of AucTeX
It is not clear to me why the act of importing a runnable version of AUCTeX into ELPA should be precluded from running a Makefile rule. It is not like ELPA can directly access git repositories and extract whatever it wants, so the import will always involve explicit steps. >> Yes, GNU ELPA can and does "git pull" every day as part of its >> automatic procedure. > If it expects a package to be in a finished state upon pulling, it means > that any standard GNU package (which requires ./configure && make && > sudo make install to work) is not supported. The GNU guidelines only require for it to be possible to use "./configure && make && make install". They don't prevent parallel use of other installation methods. I can easily accommodate a package with extra files like "configure" and "Makefile". > Basically you are asking that we throw away all configurability of > AUCTeX and convert its repository into an installed tree with a > "neutral" configuration. Not at all. > How will its Texinfo files get converted into documentation readable as > PDF or info? How will its intro.texi get converted into README by > makeinfo? After all, every GNU package should have a README, right? > Our current procedures create this README. These are indeed the questions I asked. I proposed 3 ways to do it, there might be more. None of these preclude keeping the existing make rules. >> That's the intention, indeed (tho not technically as a Git submodule, >> but morally equivalent). > "Morally equivalent"? You make it sound like you consider the current > AUCTeX repository immoral. Feeling argumentative today? Reread what I wrote: it is not talking about AUCTeX but about the technique used to include it in `elpa'. >> I'd be OK with splitting auctex into 2 packages, but does >> preview-latex work without auctex? > No. It would be nice to factor out some of its quite sophisticated > functionality into something independent from AUCTeX, LaTeX and in fact > also TeX, but at the current point of time preview-latex is not > independently useful. I'm not sure you're answering my question, so let me rephrase it: does it work with tex-mode.el? Stefan "who often uses tex-mode.el rather than AUCTeX, FWIW" ___ auctex-devel mailing list auctex-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/auctex-devel
Re: [AUCTeX-devel] Updating the GNU ELPA package of AucTeX
Stefan Monnier writes: >>> I'd be OK with splitting auctex into 2 packages, but does >>> preview-latex work without auctex? >> No. It would be nice to factor out some of its quite sophisticated >> functionality into something independent from AUCTeX, LaTeX and in fact >> also TeX, but at the current point of time preview-latex is not >> independently useful. > > I'm not sure you're answering my question, so let me rephrase it: does > it work with tex-mode.el? The answer remains "No". "Independent from AUCTeX, LaTeX and in fact also TeX" is a graded answer. As preview-latex is not independently useful without AUCTeX, it does not work with tex-mode.el. tex-mode.el would probably be low-hanging fruit as adapting preview-latex would basically require finding/abstracting a common process/commandline model for both AUCTeX and tex-mode.el. But so far nobody hated AUCTeX enough to find that worth the trouble... -- David Kastrup ___ auctex-devel mailing list auctex-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/auctex-devel
