cask VS melpa

modern projects usually use Cask https://github.com/cask/cask

Take a look at Cask.

It's an alternative to cask.

Watch the new pull requests to melpa: https://github.com/melpa/melpa/pulls

(require 'package) (add-to-list 'package-archives '("melpa" . "https://melpa.org/packages/") t) (package-initialize) (package-install 'use-package) (use-package exec-path-from-shell :ensure t :config (exec-path-from-shell-initialize)))

MELPA is definitely the biggest package archive, probably mostly on account of the lower barrier to entry compared to GNU ELPA (maybe the difference would have been less pronounced if NonGNU ELPA had been there from the beginning, but one can only speculate). MELPA has its own requirements for packages, but indeed copyright assignment to the FSF is not one of them.

I would suggest to start at reading the manual first. Then I would recommend reading the Melpa guidance, even if you do not plan to contribute your package to Melpa, since it contains very useful info about linting, writing your code etc.

The mxtoolbox link checks for SMTP blacklisting.. People won't be able to send mail from host with the IP address 178.128.185.1(which is the melpa.org webserver, not their mailserver, so everything's fine there).

Xah asked for his packages to be removed from MELPA a while back: https://github.com/melpa/melpa/issues/7755

Observe that package.el compile files when they are installed, and they are not compiled in any particular order (actually whatever directory-files returns, which is what OS returns). So if you have multiple files that depend on each other, it is something to think of. There are also some guidelines on how to structure your project on Melpa.