GNU bug report logs -
#62720
29.0.60; Not easy at all to upgrade :core packages like Eglot
Previous Next
Reported by: João Távora <joaotavora <at> gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2023 22:11:01 UTC
Severity: normal
Found in version 29.0.60
Done: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.
Full log
Message #562 received at 62720 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
> From: João Távora <joaotavora <at> gmail.com>
> Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2023 15:04:30 +0100
> Cc: dmitry <at> gutov.dev, rpluim <at> gmail.com, philipk <at> posteo.net,
> 62720 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, larsi <at> gnus.org, monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca
>
> On Wed, Apr 19, 2023 at 2:35 PM Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> wrote:
>
> > My interpretation of option 2 is that we get a newer Eglot (1.14 or
> > 1.15, whichever you decide is stable enough) with various minor
> > fallbacks intended to work around the fact that dependency packages
> > are not necessarily at their versions for which Eglot 1.14/1.15 was
> > designed to work, if the versions of those dependencies in Emacs 29.1
> > are older.
>
> Why put ourselves (mostly myself) through these chores??
Because I thought we agreed that requiring newer versions of other
packages where that could be avoided (note: "could be avoided", not
"is nice to have") is a Good Thing, and is well worth these chores.
But if you don't agree, fine; just one more disagreement between us.
> Just so that two weeks later after whatever Emacs 29 is officially
> released a more recent, "stable" version is already available?
No, just so users of Emacs 29 could have a better Eglot without any
complications.
But again, have it your way. I said I won't argue with your decision
in this matter. I just wanted you and everyone else to understand my
position on this.
This bug report was last modified 2 years and 17 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.