Post #3674237

2026-04-15 13:13 UTC

The thing is - one of the affected #emacs package maintainers @tarsius@fosstodon.org has stated explicitly that he wants to continue maintaining his package transient as is, with the cond-let dependency. Like it or not. I think Emacs package maintainers should retain their freedom to maintain packages in a way which they see fit, giving them the chance to experiment and advance Elisp (dash, llama, cond-let, whatever, ...).

Replies (2)

@jameshowell@fediscience.org 2026-04-15 14:47

@minad@mastodon.world Let me just stipulate at the outset that (1) I am not going even to look at the list thread, simultaneously that (2) I have huge respect and gratitude for everyone on that list who has contributed even a little bit. And also that (3) @tarsius@fosstodon.org has more than earned the right to maintain his packages as he wishes, and if there were any goddam justice in this world, every person who sees this post should jump on a plane to Basel in order to join a queue to wash his feet, and then carry him on a palanquin to every foreign capital in alphabetical order so he can be showered in rose petals and euro notes

Open ##3674238
@ablatedsprocket@hachyderm.io 2026-04-15 15:28

@minad@mastodon.world it's a shame that this has escalated this way. I personally like the idea of separating melpa and elpa packages, but when all of the maintainers say they're not interested it's time to let it go. Especially when, as you pointed out, if you really want to blacklist elpa packages relying on melpa it is trivial to do so. Thank you for your contributions!

Open ##3674243