GNU bug report logs - #71356
use-package doesn't load org from elpa

Previous Next

Full log

Message #37 received at 71356 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Philip Kaludercic <philipk <at> posteo.net>
Cc: 71356 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, acorallo <at> gnu.org, paaguti <at> gmail.com
Subject: Re: bug#71356: use-package doesn't load org from elpa
Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2024 12:21:26 +0300

> From: Philip Kaludercic <philipk <at> posteo.net>
> Cc: Pedro Andres Aranda Gutierrez <paaguti <at> gmail.com>,  acorallo <at> gnu.org,
>   71356 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2024 06:15:44 +0000
> 
> Sorry for the delayed response;  I don't think that has to be expected.
> While use-package can utilise package.el for package management, my
> impression is that it is at liberty to be more flexible/declarative.  

Doesn't use-package utilize package.el already?

If not, how does it handle installation and upgrades? by its own code?

> > Do you have package-install-upgrade-built-in set non-nil?  If not, can
> > you set it non-nil and try the recipe again?
> 
> I have tried it out myself, and it doesn't appear to do anything.  The
> issue looks like that `package-installed-p' doesn't respect
> package-install-upgrade-built-in or :pin.

We should fix that, I think.  If package-install-upgrade-built-in is
non-nil, use-package should upgrade built-in packages.

> > As for a feature request: what exactly is the feature requested here?
> > Are you saying that use-package should automatically upgrade built-in
> > packages?  If so, I don't think this will fly, since it would mean
> > inconsistencies with package-install.
> 
> IIUC the feature would be that if a use-package form has a
> 
>      :pin gnu
> 
> argument, then this is an indication that we want to install the package
> from GNU ELPA, disregarding the fact that Emacs already has a built-in
> version of the same package.  Sort of a package-local version of
> `package-install-upgrade-built-in'.

I'm not sure.  People tend to copy/paste recipes from the Internet
without really understanding what they do.  I think a simple :pin
should not be sufficient, we need some specialized keyword (in
addition to supporting package-install-upgrade-built-in).

> I am not familiar with the use-package code, but it seems like we could
> implement this generally in package-install, by checking
> `package-pinned-packages'.

I would prefer not to introduce another indication of whether built-in
packages should or should not be upgraded.  If we do, we will next
need to decide which one "wins" when they contradict each other.

Previous Next

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