[racket] Should `raco pkg update <x>` presume --update-deps?

I agree this example isn't a good reason to make --update-deps the default.

I expected `raco pkg update x` would update x and all its
dependencies. My expectation was wrong. What might be a good reason
would be if many other people shared this wrong expectation, but I
don't know that's the case.

On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 10:07 AM, Jay McCarthy <jay.mccarthy at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 7:44 AM, Greg Hendershott
> <greghendershott at gmail.com> wrote:
>> In response to my "I can't think of a situation" you raise with your
>> own "I can't think of a situation". Well played sir. :)
>>
>> The updated markdown parser is more likely to handle some corner cases
>> than the old one, e.g. being less finicky about requiring a blank line
>> after some element.
>>
>> I had updated Frog to be able to use the new version and give those
>> improved results, but still be compatible with the older version.
>>
>> I guess my thinking was, the newer parser was such a huge redesign, I
>> wanted the safety net of someone being able to revert to the older
>> version (at least temporarily).
>>
>> So that's why I bumped the ver on the markdown, but not the ver for
>> frog's dep on it.
>>
>> Probably I over-thunk it. And the new parser seems solid so far. As a
>> result, I should just bump frog's own version, and bump the version of
>> markdown it requires. And then all will be well.
>>
>> As for the general question: I think you're saying that with the
>> status quo `raco pkg update <x>`, if an installed dep is older than
>> required, it will install the very latest version (perhaps newer than
>> required), otherwise it will do nothing?  Whereas with --update-deps
>> it does the equivalent of an individual `raco pkg update <dep>` on
>> every dep transitively, so you'll end up with the very latest of
>> everything?
>
> Yes, that's correct. As you mention "update = remove + install", I
> hope this result is predictable. Imagine, for a moment that someone
> used your old markdown package with my unreleased super-secret Racket
> Wiki server. Then, they decided that they wanted your blog engine too.
> You wouldn't expect installing "frog" to update the markdown package.
> Since "raco pkg update <x>" is literally just removing the package and
> adding it again (with a tiny bit of a barrier in case the second
> install fails), it works the same way.
>
> I don't have a strong opinion about your suggestion of switching the
> default behavior, but I'm not sure your example is the best reason to
> switch it.
>
> My attitude is that when you "raco pkg update <x>" you are planning on
> getting new behavior in <x> and not "error fixes on <x> and everything
> else that it uses" (where "better Markdown parsing" can be seen as a
> fixing an error in the old parser). But when you use "--update-deps"
> (or "-a") then you are planning on just looking for new versions of
> anything. I like the feeling of stability this pattern gives.
>
> One case where I think "--update-deps" should definitely be implied is
> when a package "implies" other packages, such as 'main-distribution'
> implying 'srfi', because the "implies" is transparent, so the user
> doesn't necessarily know which package is really providing the feature
> they want updated.
>
> In any case, I think I will probably be able to continuing living if
> "--update-deps" were the default, but I want a better example or a few
> +1s.
>
> Jay
>
> --
> Jay McCarthy <jay at cs.byu.edu>
> Assistant Professor / Brigham Young University
> http://faculty.cs.byu.edu/~jay
>
> "The glory of God is Intelligence" - D&C 93