Hello, On Thu, Jun 14 2018, Nicholas D Steeves wrote:
> I've also been wondering about Debian's xemacs support for a year, and > the position I've formed (which Sean has confirmed) is that as a > general case packages should be transitioned to dh-elpa. Given the > specific case of unversioned emacs support as a team goal it seems > clear that xemacs support should be dropped at this time. Has there > yet been an official announcement to users that xemacs is depreciated > in Debian? This is not up to any of us, but the Debian maintainer of xemacs. And I do not believe he has any intention of dropping support. > 0. Is the Emacsen Team going to maintain all of the new packages? Yes, but don't forget the Policy requirement that at least one human be listed in Uploaders. > If so, can Peter S Galbraith and Julian Gilbey be added to the team > and to the Uploaders for all these new packages? Only if they explicitly consent to their addition to each individual package. > It is clear that any bin:emacs-goodies-el component that has a living > upstream should be transitioned to a non-native elpafied package, but > maybe this would be a good time to take advantage of one of the > conveniences of native-packaging for packages that do no have a living > upstream? eg: We apply the stack of patches to the native package > source. Conversely, if maintaining a pristine copy of the original > source is more desirable then wouldn't a non-native package be more > appropriate? > 3. Is the consensus is that the git history of all the new packages > does not need to be preserved from src:emacs-goodies-el? On both of these issues, we've all already given you our opinions in previous messages and/or IRC. Since you're doing the work, you get to decide between those opinions. > 4. I noticed that emacs-goodies-el has not had a dependency on an > elpafied packages added each time a file is removed. This seems to > indicate that when this work is completed bin:emacs-goodies-el will > just silently disappear and users will be left without the modes they > are used to having after an upgrade. Is this intended, or should > emacs-goodies-el become a dummy transitional package? Seems like an oversight. A transitional package would be useful to users. -- Sean Whitton
