Re: a few questions on GNU ELPA

[Stefan Monnier]

>       Reading elpa/README left me with a few unanswered questions.
>       First of all, – when the package is of the multi-file variety,
>       would the “release machinery” be somehow offended should
>       I import the pre-release history /without/ the respective
>       PKG/PKG.el file, – used (AIUI) for its Version: metadata field?
>       (I’ll then push that file in a separate “release” commit.)

If the <pkg>.el file is missing from the HEAD revision, the nightly
deployment scripts may complain (to me), but if it's just missing in
some previous revision, that's of no consequence.

>       Now, that same file is going to have a dozen lines of code
>       (excluding comments) at most (that is: mainly the ‘defgroup’ and
>       ‘provide’ forms.)  Should I use the GPL3+ notice for that file
>       (as the rest of the code uses), or would the simple
>       all-permissive license [1] be also acceptable?

For auctex.el I just used the standard GPL3 notice.  Saved me some
valuable thinking ;-)

>       Also regarding the release machinery, do I understand it
>       correctly that there’s currently no way to maintain several
>       (say, “development” and “stable”) branches in GNU ELPA?

That's right.  Of course, you can keep a "development" branch somewhere
in elpa.git if you want, but the GNU ELPA deployment scripts won't know
anything about it.


        Stefan