rustic-doc installs things to the user's home directory and PATH (outside Emacs) without warning

[therealpxc]

I find it a little astonishing that running rustic-doc commands have permanently installed commands in ~/.local/bin, which is on my PATH even outside Emacs. Imo this kind of behavior is not ideal, and revising it would be a good enhancement.

If this is really necessary, asking for user consent would be good. If those scripts can be located elsewhere, that would be even better.

[psibi]

Sounds good and PRs welcome. We don't have any active maintainer for rustic-doc component and it would be good if others can get involved.

[antler5]

oh lol i was just thinking the same thing
it's actually downloading them, without any integrity checks, every time the setup command is ran
i might be able to put aside the time to patch this (i'd be convenient for me), but i'm not a prolific package maintainer and would appreciate it if anyone could share their thoughts on whether i should just add integrity and user-consent or go so far as to embed it in the package distribution as a standalone script or embedded in an .el (like, i don't actually know if that would make sense to do, the idea is that existing tooling like file glob would pick it up but it depends on what formats the package is distributed in, where's uploaded, how their pipelines work re: mixed file-extensions -- if there's no reason to consider embedding that would be great i just don't feel i can assume it to be the case, chestertons fence and all). what would cause the least disruption for other downstream packagers and users?
brotzeit/rustic#588