Consider following the XDG base-dir specification

[nspaeth]

Consider following the The XDG base-dir specification more closely, which defines the following environment variables:

• $XDG_DATA_HOME - user-specific data files default: $HOME/.local/share
• Could use for ELPA directory.
• $XDG_CONFIG_HOME - user-specific configuration files default: $HOME/.config
• Currently using $XDG_CONFIG_HOME/crafted-emacs
• $XDG_STATE_HOME user-specific state data default: $HOME/.local/state
  contains state data that should persist between (application) restarts, but that is not important or portable enough to the user that it should be stored in $XDG_DATA_HOME. It may contain:
  • actions history (logs, history, recently used files, …)
  • current state of the application that can be reused on a restart (view, layout, open files, undo history, …)
• $XDG_CACHE_HOME - user-specific non-essential (cached) data default:* $HOME/.cache
• Could use for .elc files?
• $XDG_RUNTIME_DIR - user-specific runtime files and other file objects default: $HOME/.local/bin
• Could use for lock files?

My $XDG_CONFIG_HOME/crafted-emacs/ currently contains the directories var/ elpa/ and etc/, which could be symlinked to their XDG counterparts.

I feel like following this specification and other standards, although not explicitly stated, aligns with the spirit of this project. I also think that it would make it easier for people to ignore non-essential files in their backups or version-controlled configs.

[jeffbowman]

XDG directory structure is not portable to Microsoft Windows. Not against a PR for this work, per se, but would prefer a flag to turn it on or off at the users preference. Consider the comments in #176 .

People are pretty used to having all of their Emacs configuration contained in the user-emacs-directory and we break that a bit currently by moving things to the crafted-config-path instead as an attempt to keep the user-emacs-directory relatively clean. That has already caused some questions (like "why did we do that anyway?"), so I can't imagine an XDG setup would be any more well received. I could be wrong though.

[nspaeth]

I should have search the existing issues!

XDG directory structure is not portable to Microsoft Windows.

I guess that depends on whether or not you agree with this interpretation.

Either way, I agree that this functionality should exist behind a flag given its divergence from emacs history.

After seeing the discussion in other issues I think I could tackle a pull request this weekend for review.

[jeffbowman]

I look forward to your PR. You might consider looking into the built-in xdg elisp package as well.

[ajxn]

Is there any work going on this? It would been great to have this in Crafted-Emacs.

[jeffbowman]

I thought @nspaeth was working on a PR, haven't seen anything come in, and I'm not working on it personally.

[jeffbowman]

Closing in anticipation of Crafted Emacs V2.