Decouple from el-get about elhome HOT 7 OPEN

I don't think el-get is evil I think it's good actually, but it's not for all.

El-get is complicated, but it do complex actions. Also requires makeinfo which does not install by default in even in most popular Linux disros, I don't even mention win and mac.

In most cases package.el is OK, so lets make elhome play well with package.el

First step was adding ElHome to MELPA.

I think now we need to give users possibility to choose what library to use to manage packages: stock package.el or advanced el-get.

Then modify README according this. And do something with startup/10-el-get.el: we can't delete it, but we can't leave it as-is too.

from elhome.

You may not know this, but I was a major contributor to el-get for a while; it is just too undisciplined. In particular, package initialization often does lots of work up-front that should be done lazily, thereby slowing down startup. Furthermore, I've often been stuck in inexplicable situations with el-get where it keeps trying to install the same package, or complains about inconsistencies in its own record-keeping. Anyway, even if we don't agree on its "good-ness", I think we all agree that it should be possible to use elhome without it.

from elhome.

The first thing I did was to change to an Apache-like configuration where the "startup" files were all moved to a "startup-available" directory, and then I linked everything but 10-el-get.el into the "startup" directory. Does this make sense as a way to do configuration?

from elhome.

Yes it make sense, but I think that creating of symlinks would be not so trivial task for MS Windows users.

Also no changes should be made in cloned repo (or package dir) to customize elhome.
In my setup I use "~/.emacs.d" as elhome-directory, and elhome's startup are separated from my own startup files.

I propose to move startup/10-el-get.el into legacy/10-el-get.el and notify users about this change.

from elhome.

SGTM

Sent from my moss-covered three-handled family gradunza

On Nov 5, 2013, at 5:23 AM, Demyan Rogozhin [email protected] wrote:

Yes it make sense, but I think that creating of symlinks would be not so trivial task for MS Windows users.

Also no changes should be made in cloned repo (or package dir) to customize elhome.
In my setup I use "~/.emacs.d" as elhome-directory, and elhome's startup are separated from my own startup files.

I propose to move startup/10-el-get.el into legacy/10-el-get.el and notify users about this change.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

from elhome.

This is done, right? Should I close it?

from elhome.

I move the file to "legacy", but some words need to be said in readme.

from elhome.