GNU bug report logs - #76978
31.0.50; Archive information not displayed for installed packages in *Packages* buffer

Previous Next

Full log

Message #32 received at 76978 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: david <davidimagid <at> gmail.com>
To: Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
Cc: Philip Kaludercic <philipk <at> posteo.net>, Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>,
 76978 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Stefan Kangas <stefankangas <at> gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] package.el: Add built-in version check and loaded
 package marking
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2025 19:29:13 -0400

Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca> writes:

>> I also changed "activated" to "loaded", as the latter is more accurate
>> for marking packages in the "Other versions" section.
>
> Hmm... the two terms do not mean the same thing.  "Loaded" refers to the
> package's `.el` files having been `load`ed, whereas "activated" means
> that the package's directory has been added to `load-path` and its
> `<PKG>-autoloads.el` file has been loaded.
>
> The variable `package-activated-list` keeps track, as the name suggests,
> of packages that have been activated, not loaded.
>
  Should we mark packages in "Other versions" as "activated" or "loaded"
  (like the GNU ELPA package Marginalia, which shows "Loaded" when
  calling `locate-library`)? Currently, "Other versions" redundantly
  includes the described package. I aim to improve this by indicating if
  the package is in `load-path`, helping users identify active or loaded
  packages. What do you recommend?
  >
> Also, I had questions in my previous review and I haven't seen any
> answer to them (most importantly about copyright paperwork).
>
Yes, I have signed the copyright paperwork. I will carefully review your
suggestions and prepare an updated patch addressing them. Thank you for
your thorough feedback and for keeping an eye on the patch.

Previous Next

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