Federico Beffa <be...@ieee.org> skribis: > On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 2:13 PM, Ludovic Courtès <l...@gnu.org> wrote: >>>> guix.el already takes care of that (info "(guix) Emacs Initial Setup"), >>>> so that should be enough. >>> >>> Unfortunately this doesn't work without modification. The reason is >>> that I follow the emacs package.el strategy to install each ELPA >>> package in it's own sub-directory. Specifically, I'm installing each >>> package into ".../site-lisp/guix.d/PACKAGE-NAME-VERSION/". The code >>> in 'guix.el', however, doesn't look in sub-directories below the >>> profile's '.../site-lisp'. >> >> What does it bring us to follow package.el’s strategy? >> >> My impression is that we could simply follow what guix.el already does, >> and thus avoid that guix.d/PACKAGE-VERSION sub-directory. Of course we >> can adjust guix.el as we see fit, but package.el is a completely >> separate beast anyway. Am I missing something? > > Hi Ludo, > > the reason for using separate sub-directories is that many packages > include files, such as README, ChangeLog, ..., that are likely to > clash. Even if we would delete all non ".el" files (which probably is > not safe), with more than 2500 packages on MELPA, it is possible that > we would still experience some name clashes. I can imagine that > someone preparing a package may be unaware of the existence of some > other package, possibly not very popular in his circle.
What about copying all the .el files to .../site-lisp, and copy the other files elsewhere (for instance, ‘README’ and ‘ChangeLog’ to share/doc/$PACKAGE, and .info files to share/info)? Note that name clashes in profiles are annoying, but not fatal. Thanks, Ludo’.
