> For crying out loud, one does not have to look in the "sources of > this" package or use "Google" searches. The package has > documentation.
Most people use search engines to find documentation these days. That's not a value judgement; it's just a statement of fact. > The documentation is available in the usual places (Info) Info is not as standard as you make it out to be. I investigated the 486 packages that I have installed, and found that 297 of them have at least minimal documentation hosted on GitHub in the form of a README.md, while only 26 of them include any Info documentation. > The menus of the package also contain an entry for submitting bug > reports. That is true, but the vast majority of packages do not contain any such menu entries. Furthermore, many users do not use the Emacs menus. > However, Lisp programs that process this list should tolerate > directories both with and without trailing slashes. [...] as a > package manager, your code _certainly_ should adhere to the > instructions in load-path documentation. My package manager does not exactly fall under the rubric of "Lisp programs that process this list". It does not do any processing, really; it just adds an entry. If that is counted as processing, then every time any Lisp program adds anything to `load-path', it should be checking to make sure there is not a duplicate entry with a trailing slash. Since nobody does that, I inferred that it doesn't make much sense in this case either. --- Looking at the summary page for the bug-auctex list, I see that it does indeed mention M-x TeX-submit-bug-report, so it was a mistake for me to say that it didn't. Sorry about that. --- Best regards, Radon Rosborough _______________________________________________ bug-auctex mailing list firstname.lastname@example.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-auctex