Re: [PATCH] epm.el: A CLI tool for package.el

2023-05-05 Thread Ihor Radchenko
Max Nikulin writes: > Do you have any arguments against switching from emacs -Q to emacs -q? I > am still unsure if it is safe enough, but not doing it is not better. I > am considering adding -q to this script when it is called directly. > Unfortunately Emacs does not have an option to overri

Re: [PATCH] epm.el: A CLI tool for package.el

2023-05-04 Thread Max Nikulin
On 04/05/2023 17:24, Ihor Radchenko wrote: Max Nikulin writes: For those who are not familiar with convention any target may be specified in docs, keeping usual meaning of the default "all" target. I am mostly concerned about the existing users who are already settled on running the default "m

Re: [PATCH] epm.el: A CLI tool for package.el

2023-05-04 Thread Ihor Radchenko
Max Nikulin writes: >> Good idea. Although, we should not overdo this package management thing. >> If we really need complex functionality here, we should better just use >> cask/eldev instead of re-inventing the wheel. > > I have not tried cask or eldev, so I can not reason on supposed workflow.

[PATCH] epm.el: A CLI tool for package.el

2023-05-03 Thread Max Nikulin
ot include it What does this comment refer to? To lack of my experience with package.el and site-lisp infrastructure.From 6e0d73abf527901df080f0f5d7d272722d89c87a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Max Nikulin Date: Wed, 3 May 2023 18:39:49 +0700 Subject: [PATCH] epm.el: A CLI tool for package.el * mk/epm.el: A helper