GNU bug report logs - #62750
29.0.50; Commands 'package-update' and 'package-update-all' should be called '*-upgrade'

Previous Next

Package: emacs;

Reported by: Adam Porter <adam <at> alphapapa.net>

Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2023 12:54:01 UTC

Severity: normal

Found in version 29.0.50

Done: Dmitry Gutov <dmitry <at> gutov.dev>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Full log


View this message in rfc822 format

From: Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
To: Dmitry Gutov <dmitry <at> gutov.dev>
Cc: Adam Porter <adam <at> alphapapa.net>, larsi <at> gnus.org, Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>, philipk <at> posteo.net, 62750 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#62750: 29.0.50; Commands 'package-update' and 'package-update-all' should be called '*-upgrade'
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2023 21:55:17 -0400
> That might also be the case when upgrading a package that some others
> depend on (newer version could also have macros deleted or renamed).

We try to make upgrades "safe", but there's usually no such effort the
other way around, so downgrading is definitely more risky in practice,
even though in theory things can break in all cases.

> Would "update" be a more proper term to cover both upgrading and
> downgrading?

I think if you specify the target version, then `package-install` sounds
about right (and I suspect it may already "work").

> Or that.  We don't keep older versions around in ELPA anyway, so for
> now the question is moot.

Well, we do keep them some `elpa.gnu.org` but indeed the ELPA protocol
doesn't include any way to advertise them.


        Stefan





This bug report was last modified 2 years and 80 days ago.

Previous Next


GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.