[ESS-bugs] ESS 13.09-1 with old R versions fails pretty badly

[Sparapani, Rodney]

MM> Do we really care for MELPA for *UN*released versions of ESS ??

> I think rolling releases are better for small projects. That means more
> testers, quicker bug fixes and, most importantly, fixes get to end users
> really quickly (MELPA is updated every hour).

> My personal belief is that, eventually, MELPA should become the *only*
> official source of ESS. No debian package, no Vincent's bundle. This is
> how modern emacs works, and it is the fastest and easiest route for the
> users. We should adapt IMO. Resistance is futile :-)

The key word above is "eventually".  It does seem like MELPA will be the
way to go.  However, the last time I checked, it was not documented.
And certainly, ESS (meaning us) provide no MELPA docs whatsoever:
I checked.  But, I would definitely be happy if such a single source would
come about.  But, how is MELPA being updated every hour?  What if I break
SVN (as I have on occasion)?  Is MELPA broken?  I don't like automatic updates.  
I was hoping Emacs would adopt an XEmacs-like package system which had
developer initiated releases, but apparently it is not going to happen.  Progress?

MM> start from. The others (even if they are more than 0.05% must build,
MM> yes, that's true for all free software I've known.

> Well, emacs packages need not be build in order to work and people are
> used to this simple scheme. Let's try not to introduce additional sticks
> in the wheels, we already have enough of them.

True.  But, when you are installing it on a server for many users like we
have, building it and installing it is the easiest way right now.