Re: bug#68660: 29.2; ELPA: Wrong type argument w. multiple maintainers in package-menu-mode
Amin Bandali <[email protected]> Sat, 27 Jan 2024 15:30:15 -0500
| Newsgroups | gmane.emacs.erc.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
J.P. writes: > Stefan Monnier <[email protected]> writes: > >>>>> I can see several ways to "fix" this, but I think the simplest would be >>> Would one of those several ways possibly include overriding the >>> `package-desc-extras' :maintainer item scraped by `lm-maintainers' with >>> a spec item from an elpa-packages entry? I see that support for a >>> `:maintainer' keyword was recently added, but it appears to serve some >>> other purpose. Anyway, I've attached a sketch of what I'm trying to >>> describe, but I'm rather unfamiliar with this program. >> >> Hmm... this requires manual work per package, and it drops support for >> multiple maintainers altogether, so I'd rather not go there. I was >> thinking instead of making `:maintainer` hold only a single item (the >> improper list thingy) and use `:maintainers` to hold the list of >> maintainers when there's more than one, which would be more >> backward compatible and would solve the problem for all packages. > > Yes, what you describe definitely seems preferable. So, I guess > `:maintainer' (singular) will always be populated no matter what, for > the benefit of legacy clients who only speak the one. And newer clients > will be taught to always first check `:maintainers' (plural). > > Please let me know if anything is required from ERC to make this a > reality. And, of course, I very much appreciate your taking the time. > Sorry I'm a bit out of the loop & probably missing some context here. I think I'd prefer to keep the personal names in ERC's Maintainer(s) field if possible, but if it's too much of a hassle and/or impossible then of course that's a different story. I'll defer to J.P. and you to go forward with whatever works best. Thanks, -a