Re: [AUCTeX-devel] auctex pkg uptodate?

[Tassilo Horn]

Uwe Brauer <address@hidden> writes:

>    > The answer is no. The ELPA version is more current with several
>    > fixes that the 11.87 still has (but it's still nearer to 11.87 than
>    > to the Git HEAD). The reason is that it's trivial to roll a new
>    > ELPA release while regular releases require much more effort.
>
> Oh this is not good. What are the differences? For example is Moses
> excellent patch concerning inverse-forward search in git head and/or
> ELPA?

It's only in Git head.  The ELPA release is basically 11.87 + some
bugfixes, but no new features.

>    > So at the current point in time, I'd recommend to either use the
>    > Git HEAD or the ELPA release.
>
> I cannot use ELPA for xemacs :'(.

Ah, I've though you've switched over when reading your latest mails. ;-)
Well, then you probably should use the Git version.

> The reason why I am asking this, is the fact that I am now convinced
> that 11.87 has some important improvement over 11.84

We very much hope so!  And the git head has many improvements over
11.87, too.

> and therefore I[1] would like to release an official version of its
> corresponding xemacs pkg (that is the Xemacs's more than a decade old
> counterpart of EPLA).[2]

Ah, I guess you mean the xemacs package for the xemacs package manager,
not the xemacs AUCTeX release we're rolling on our own, right?

In any case, I think you probably want to wait until we release 11.88
(hopefully anytime soon), and then use that as a base for the xemacs
package.

Out of couriosity, what's the hurdle/difference of our official AUCTeX
XEmacs package and the official XEmacs AUCTeX package in the XEmacs
package repo?

> In order to do so, I would rather not base it on the version found on
> the webpage, but instead I really would like to include at least Moses
> patch. About the other enhancements I cannot judge since I did not try
> them out so I would rather stay away from the git version.

I can understand that, but I have nothing to offer.  You could just grab
the 11.87 release and patch it with the fixes and enhancements you like.
Or as said above, wait for 11.88, but of course that will be released
From the git head, so more testing effort on your side.

> Then we have floating around various version:
>
>     -  the official tar.gz and pkg.tar.gz on the web site.
>
>     -  the EPLA/GIT version (not sure I understand whether they are
>        equal or not)
>
>     -  the official xemacs pkg.
>
> Is this desirable?

Surely, no.  In an ideal world, I'd simply drop all compatibility, all
the build complexity, and simply develop AUCTeX in the ELPA repo (or
keep the ELPA AUCTeX branch in strict sync with the AUCTeX git repo),
and only do ELPA releases.  For users, that's by far the easiest and
fool-proof way of getting AUCTeX, and for us maintainers, that's the
easiest way to cut new releases.

Now of course, that would exclude XEmacs and users of older emacsen, so
that's not realistic for now.  But it would suit me as a maintainer who
favors releasing frequently, preferably after every single fixed bug and
every new feature.

> Are there alternatives?

I'm not sure.  I think, the existence of the official XEmacs package
versus the XEmacs AUCTeX release has mostly non-technical reasons, but
I'm not remembering details.

With respect to ELPA and Git: the problem is that ELPAs file and
directory structure is different (that's a restriction), and the ELPA
repo doesn't have the complex build stuff.  It would be very, very, very
valuable if someone with better makefile foo than me would restructure
the AUCTeX Git repo according to the restrictions of the ELPA machinery,
so that if fact the auctex ELPA branch and the official AUCTeX git head
were the same.

Bye,
Tassilo

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature