Re: dash.el [was: Re: Imports / inclusion of s.el into Emacs]

[Dmitry Gutov]

On 17.05.2020 22:30, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > From: Dmitry Gutov <address@hidden>
> > Date: Sun, 17 May 2020 22:21:33 +0300
> > Cc: address@hidden, address@hidden, address@hidden, address@hidden,
> >   address@hidden, address@hidden, address@hidden
> >
> > On 17.05.2020 21:38, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > > What happened here was something completely different.  "Here's a new
> > > package, it does this and that." -- "Not sure we should have it in
> > > core, how about if you put it on ELPA for the time being?"
> >
> > Yes, we did say that.
> >
> > And then, we never went back to reconsider, to put any of such packages
> > into the core.
>
> That's not very relevant to the issue at hand.  Let's not change the
> subject.

I don't understand what makes you say that.

> > And we never got any complaints about that, either.
>
> Here I am, complaining.

You're not the author of any of these packages. Not an ELPA user either, 
IIUC.

> > So I'm saying it's generally a good thing for most packages, to be put
> > into ELPA instead. We didn't explain that outright (which is
> > suboptimal), but it seems like most submitters realized this afterward.
>
> Of course, you'd say that: you think packages should be on ELPA as a
> matter of principle. You also think we should take some of what is
> already in Emacs and put it on ELPA instead.  I wouldn't expect a
> balanced opinion from you on this matter.

Way to dismiss the arguments without reading.

Since your experience with ELPA is basically zero, how are you going to 
determine what is a balanced opinion, and what isn't?