Thomas Koch wrote:
> - throwing even more stuff into emacs-goodies-el?
>
> By the way: What's the state of emacs-goodies-el?
Alive but not active. It's overdue for a massive cleanup and removal of
old cruft.
> Has anybody contact
> to the mai
Hi,
David Bremner wrote:
> > - one debian package per elpa package?
>
> This is my personal preference;
Mine, too, despite the FTP-Masters will argue about (respectively
already did).
IMHO the fine granularity of packages in Debian is one of the key
features and advantages compared to other dis
Thomas Koch writes:
> There will surely be better examples that can't be solved by just denying
> their usability for a wider audience.
>
Sure, a good example is the helpfully named "s", which is a single
source file of about 20k, but depended on by many other elpa packages.
> So:
> - one debi
On 14079 March 1977, Thomas Koch wrote:
> So:
> - one debian package per elpa package?
*EEE*
> - one big elpa-small-packages package?
Maybe not one big one, but one per "topic". Like "packages around
ido/magit", "packages for UI changes", ...
--
bye, Joerg
I think we didn't really come to a conclusion at debconf on how to proceed
with very small elpa packages. Examples, just the source code with comments:
- goto-last-change.el, 5.8k, optional dependency of evil mode
- ido-vertical-mode.el, 15k
There will surely be better examples that can't be sol
5 matches
Mail list logo
