bug#62720: 29.0.60; Not easy at all to upgrade :core packages like Eglot

[Dmitry Gutov]

On 24/04/2023 14:58, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2023 00:53:30 +0300
> > Cc: jporterbugs@gmail.com, philipk@posteo.net, 62720@debbugs.gnu.org,
> >   joaotavora@gmail.com, larsi@gnus.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca
> > From: Dmitry Gutov <dmitry@gutov.dev>
> >
> > On 23/04/2023 17:24, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > > > Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2023 16:11:44 +0300
> > > > Cc: jporterbugs@gmail.com, philipk@posteo.net, 62720@debbugs.gnu.org,
> > > >    joaotavora@gmail.com, larsi@gnus.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca
> > > > From: Dmitry Gutov <dmitry@gutov.dev>
> > > >
> > > > > > It addressed two last points from your previous email, obviously.
> > > > > Which points are those?  Please help me identify them.
> > > >
> > > > These two:
> > > >
> > > >    > There is already such an option, added as part of fixing this bug.
> > > >
> > > > The binding was added, so now we straight away delegate to package-install.
> > >
> > > I meant to give the user the control on whether package-update will
> > > update built-in packages, like we did with package-install: either via
> > > prefix argument or by customizing the user option.
> >
> > That would be a different change, though.
> >
> > So what are we guarding against here? That the user will choose a
> > built-in package to upgrade by accident?
>
> Yes.  Also, against invocations of this command from other commands
> and from the menu.

It's not in the menu. There are also no known callers aside from 
package-update-all.

> > And we'll show her an error, saying "use the prefix argument"?
>
> No, I think we'll do whatever the code does today when passed a
> built-in package.

Very well, here's the next version. It adds a new optional argument to 
the function (so that people can evaluate e.g. (package-update 'eglot 
t)). When called interactively, it is determined by current-prefix-argument.

Also please review the docstring change.

Regarding obeying package-install-upgrade-built-in, I think it would 
need to be renamed, and both package-update-all and 
package-menu-mark-upgrades would need to be made obey it too. All that 
could be done in a subsequent change.

package-update-fix.diff
Description: Text Data