[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#69410: 30.0.50; [WISHLIST] Use-package: allow :ensure to accept pack
From: |
Philip Kaludercic |
Subject: |
bug#69410: 30.0.50; [WISHLIST] Use-package: allow :ensure to accept package spec instead of separate :vc keyword |
Date: |
Mon, 01 Jul 2024 19:57:42 +0000 |
Tony Zorman <soliditsallgood@mailbox.org> writes:
> On Sun, Jun 30 2024 10:42, Philip Kaludercic wrote:
>> No Wayman <iarchivedmywholelife@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> I think it would be cleaner to allow use-package's :ensure keyword to
>>> accept the arguments the :vc keyword currently does. e.g.
>>>
>>> ;; Install EXAMPLE package from ELPA archive
>>> (use-package example :ensure t)
>>>
>>> ;; Install EXAMPLE package from source
>>> (use-package example :ensure (:url
>>> "https://www.forge.com/maintainer/example"))
>>>
>>> My reasoning is that this has greater potential to work across
>>> multiple package managers.
>>> Instead of each package manager adding their own use-package keyword
>>> (e.g. :vc, :straight, :elpaca), they can all interpret the :ensure
>>> keyword's value. It would make things simpler for package maintainers
>>> offering example declarations and users switching between package
>>> managers.
>>
>> I am adding Tony to the CCs, as he implemented the :vc keyword to see if
>> he has anything to comment (generally it is good to add a X-Debbugs-CC
>> header, mentioning specific maintainers or people involved in a feature
>> when submitting a bug).
>
> Thanks. To be honest, I'm not a big fan of trying to cram everything
> into :ensure. Implementation wise, I feel like it would make things much
> messier than they are now—especially if the final goal is to maybe
> extend this to other package managers. By the same thought, one might
> argue that something like :load-path should be inlined into :ensure as
> well, which is not a good idea in my opinion.
>
> In either case, I think that
>
> (use-package example
> :ensure (:url "https://www.forge.com/maintainer/example"))
>
> is not that much more verbose (or harder to adjust) than
>
> (use-package example
> :ensure t
> :vc (:url "https://www.forge.com/maintainer/example"))
BTW Does it ever make sense to give a :vc keyword without :ensure t or
enabling `use-package-always-ensure'?
> This is especially true since use-package-always-ensure exists (and many
> people use it) so one would just have to write
>
> (use-package example
> :vc (:url "https://www.forge.com/maintainer/example"))
>
> Any kind of backwards compatibility with a hypothetical :straight
> keyword would not work in either case, because :straight already exists
> in straight.el and it has a completely different package specification
> attached to it.
1+
>> My own take is that setting aside timing issues and the fact that the
>> Emacs 30 branch has been cut, ...
>>
>> - The :vc keyword allows just passing t to download the package as
>> specified in the ELPA archive. I don't see an elegant away to allow
>> this using :ensure.
>
> Yes backwards compatibility might be a bit of a pain—especially with a
> view on use-package-always-ensure—save having self-defeating constructs
> like :ensure (:vc …).
I am not sure what you mean here?
> Tony
--
Philip Kaludercic on peregrine
- bug#69410: 30.0.50; [WISHLIST] Use-package: allow :ensure to accept package spec instead of separate :vc keyword, Tony Zorman, 2024/07/01
- Message not available
- bug#69410: 30.0.50; [WISHLIST] Use-package: allow :ensure to accept package spec instead of separate :vc keyword, No Wayman, 2024/07/01
- bug#69410: 30.0.50; [WISHLIST] Use-package: allow :ensure to accept package spec instead of separate :vc keyword, Philip Kaludercic, 2024/07/03
- bug#69410: 30.0.50; [WISHLIST] Use-package: allow :ensure to accept package spec instead of separate :vc keyword, No Wayman, 2024/07/08
- bug#69410: 30.0.50; [WISHLIST] Use-package: allow :ensure to accept package spec instead of separate :vc keyword, Philip Kaludercic, 2024/07/08
- bug#69410: 30.0.50; [WISHLIST] Use-package: allow :ensure to accept package spec instead of separate :vc keyword, No Wayman, 2024/07/08
- bug#69410: 30.0.50; [WISHLIST] Use-package: allow :ensure to accept package spec instead of separate :vc keyword, Philip Kaludercic, 2024/07/09
- bug#69410: 30.0.50; [WISHLIST] Use-package: allow :ensure to accept package spec instead of separate :vc keyword, No Wayman, 2024/07/09
- bug#69410: 30.0.50; [WISHLIST] Use-package: allow :ensure to accept package spec instead of separate :vc keyword, Michael Albinus, 2024/07/09
- bug#69410: 30.0.50; [WISHLIST] Use-package: allow :ensure to accept package spec instead of separate :vc keyword, Philip Kaludercic, 2024/07/09
bug#69410: 30.0.50; [WISHLIST] Use-package: allow :ensure to accept package spec instead of separate :vc keyword,
Philip Kaludercic <=
Message not available