Re: [O] Bleeding edge in elpa

[Nikolai Weibull]

On Sun, Mar 8, 2015 at 6:59 PM, Achim Gratz <address@hidden> wrote:
> Nikolai Weibull writes:
>> Is trying to manage it via git+make oneself less likely to cause
>> incidents?

> There's a bunch of people who seem to manage it just fine.

Did I say otherwise?

Does this preclude making an alternative available, one that at least
some would consider simpler to access?

>> From the FAQ:
>>
>> The master branch of the git repository always contains the bleeding
>> edge development code. This is important for Org's fast development,
>> because code on master gets checked out by many people daily and we
>> quickly receive bug reports if something is wrong. On rare occasions,
>> this code may not function perfectly for a limited time while we are
>> trying to fix things. It is therefore recommended to keep a known-good
>> version of org-mode installed outside the source tree and always run
>> the full test suite before using a new version from master.

> Yes, if the absolutely latest master doesn't work, people can just check
> out whatever version was working for them last and continue without
> waiting for the next snapshot from ELPA /which may or may not work).

See below.

>> The more time that passes between releases, the harder it is to
>> release a new version.
>>
>> And as this is the case here, having easy access to the latest
>> “version” would lessen the effect of this.  It would also allow more
>> people to find bugs.

> It doesn't get any easier than it already is.

(How can this statement possibly be true?)

> Having both a stable and
> an unstable version of Org avilable via ELPA is a non-starter for the
> simple reason that the package manager can't deal with the versioning
> problems this would introduce.

This could, I assume, and was sort of implied in my original e-mail,
be solved by providing an “org” package as it is today (based off of
maint) and an “org-edge” package that’d be based off of master.