Re: using use-package

[Phillip Lord]

Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes:

>>> The core part of "Packaging" in the elpa.git world basically means:
>>> - Start the package's main file with ";;; <name> --- <description>"
>>> - Sprinkle a few ";;;###autoload"s.
>>> - Add a "Package-Requires:" (when needed).
>>> This is very straightforward and can be done from the very beginning
>>> of development.
>> I use use-package to load the modules in my personal configuration,
>> which I don't intend to ever release or install as ELPA packages. Still,
>> this is a minor use.
>
> For those, Package-Requires is probably unneeded (tho if you have such
> things in your use-package you could move them there),

I generally do not do dependency stuff with use-package. In this case, I
would put a "require" statement into the secondary file. I think I will
not go the root of Package-Requires. As I said in the multi-line
discussion, I find Package-Requires: headers flawed, as they are
comments and yet still have to be a valid sexp.


>> Yes. I use cask (normally via the python wrapper), but elpakit is also
>> an option here.
>
> Not sure about Cask, but IIUC elpakit will generate a package-archive,
> whereas we just want to turn the source tree into a valid "installed ELPA
> package" without going through "make a tarball, create an
> archive-contents, package-install".
>
> I.e. all we want (to make those packages look like they were installed
> via package.el) is to create/update a *-pkg.el and a *-autoloads.el
> (we can add byte-compilation, but it's not indispensable).

Indeed. Cask doesn't have that option at the moment. It's not hard,
though

(let ((dir (make-temp-name "cask")))
  (cask-cli/package dir)
  (package-install-file
      (concat dir
         default-directory ".tar")))

that sort of thing (untested for demonstration purposes only). The
easiest way to have a package look like it was installed via package.el
is surely to install it via package.el!

Phil