[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: NonGNU ELPA: Conditions for accepting a potential new package 'rmsbo
From: |
Philip Kaludercic |
Subject: |
Re: NonGNU ELPA: Conditions for accepting a potential new package 'rmsbolt' ? |
Date: |
Tue, 27 Feb 2024 17:10:18 +0000 |
Jay Kamat <jaygkamat@gmail.com> writes:
> Philip Kaludercic <philipk@posteo.net> writes:
>
> Might take me a while to fully review and test all the changes, but
> they look good, so once I do so, I'll include them!
>
>> +(defcustom rmsbolt-mode-lighter " RMS🗲" ;could the unicode
>> charachter be removed? it can unnecessarily resize the mode line.
>
> Sure - I can remove it. I'll do it after I apply your patch generally.
Just keep in mind that I didn't send a patch. I just find it convenient
to send comments in form of a diff.
>> -(defun rmsbolt--convert-file-name-to-system-type (file-name)
>> +(defun rmsbolt--convert-file-name-to-system-type (file-name)
>> ;perhaps use `convert-standard-filename'?
>
> Right now, a contributor is trying to improve this area/enable tramp
> support - so I'd like to keep this as stable as possible while they do
> so. But this is a great suggestion - I'll let them know about this
> function and hopefully it will help them in their change as well!
No problem.
>>
>> ;;;;; Starter Definitions
>>
>> ;; IIUC, this "starter" business is not a necessary part of RMSBolt, but is
>> ;; a way to provide sample files with which users can try out RMSBolt.
>>
>> -(defvar rmsbolt-starter-files
>> +(defvar rmsbolt-starter-files ;should this be part
>> of a secondary file that isn't loaded by default?
>
> Maybe - I think I would load it by default though - as this is the
> easiest way for someone to try out the package. In my personal usage I
> almost always start from one of these files and add my changes. I
> should update the comment above with that information as well.
It shouldn't matter, as long as the command that uses
`rmsbolt-starter-files' remains auto-loaded, even if the command is
not defined in the main file.
> Thanks! I just want to be doubly sure of all the changes before I
> commit them, I'll try to do that testing tomorrow - I'm a bit busy
> today. I'll also try to fix any remaining checkdoc errors.
Thanks!
> -Jay
>
--
Philip Kaludercic on peregrine
- NonGNU ELPA: Conditions for accepting a potential new package 'rmsbolt' ?, Jeremy Bryant, 2024/02/25
- Re: NonGNU ELPA: Conditions for accepting a potential new package 'rmsbolt' ?, Philip Kaludercic, 2024/02/26
- Re: NonGNU ELPA: Conditions for accepting a potential new package 'rmsbolt' ?, Stefan Monnier, 2024/02/27
- Re: NonGNU ELPA: Conditions for accepting a potential new package 'rmsbolt' ?, Philip Kaludercic, 2024/02/27
- Re: NonGNU ELPA: Conditions for accepting a potential new package 'rmsbolt' ?, Stefan Monnier, 2024/02/27
- Re: NonGNU ELPA: Conditions for accepting a potential new package 'rmsbolt' ?, Philip Kaludercic, 2024/02/27
- Re: NonGNU ELPA: Conditions for accepting a potential new package 'rmsbolt' ?, Stefan Monnier, 2024/02/27
- Re: NonGNU ELPA: Conditions for accepting a potential new package 'rmsbolt' ?, Eli Zaretskii, 2024/02/27