From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dmitry Gutov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Adding Flycheck to NonGNU ELPA Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2024 19:38:55 +0200 Message-ID: <706be920-cbd4-42d8-8c76-3abdb7e7b026@gutov.dev> References: <41bdb94a-3f9c-4b46-b061-b0c5e31a403e@app.fastmail.com> <871q98bb7q.fsf@posteo.net> <72490bec-175b-46b6-aaf9-153b3c242b70@app.fastmail.com> <87le7g9tg9.fsf@posteo.net> <874je413vo.fsf@tanaka.verona.se> <87le7f1hlq.fsf@posteo.net> <69829f55-511b-4543-9a1b-938a5e8ac08c@gutov.dev> <87zfvtwy2w.fsf@posteo.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="28267"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cc: joakim@verona.se, Bozhidar Batsov , Emacs Devel , Stefan Monnier To: Philip Kaludercic Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Feb 21 18:40:12 2024 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1rcqZo-00076O-1Z for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 21 Feb 2024 18:40:12 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rcqYs-0007TY-OI; Wed, 21 Feb 2024 12:39:14 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rcqYq-0007Pr-EQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 21 Feb 2024 12:39:13 -0500 Original-Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.29]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rcqYm-00039r-5k for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 21 Feb 2024 12:39:12 -0500 Original-Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.46]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 543F15C0048; Wed, 21 Feb 2024 12:38:59 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 21 Feb 2024 12:38:59 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gutov.dev; h=cc :cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:content-type:date :date:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:reply-to:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm2; t=1708537139; x=1708623539; bh=OHsdVFIvKZlR0uW78/bR/McoFxJDQwPYekOCiNwBzmM=; b= qn+pQW27t80XmgUCoESM/squMHuUsmnGGaG1VFrOADVAT/eiZ0dCcZ4EXjx93tGX QCGKhgPuUP9IbDRiJmHtWm4TG1PrTF7GsE+OywAOuEuUOcSCFy2MByh304I8MYct VUmUJ2zQMlNRA8IU85+m2hPWjXU91Hy65couwK36tOTKiKmKiOjaoZTf0LbmmuaX ohSl0ZNMH0PPVB3WjarQkF0Hc3kHEGfsyYC8XMGsS5amqd/TmOOeyTkGNNfdyt0d KRPjGKg+XXnE8aLSGH41FecoyIh5EkdiYmLBILN3gIT2OcAfFQnpis5qkLsd8kPd NdsKapldOOlphQ24lPv8LA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:content-type:date:date:feedback-id:feedback-id :from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:reply-to:subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy :x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; t=1708537139; x= 1708623539; bh=OHsdVFIvKZlR0uW78/bR/McoFxJDQwPYekOCiNwBzmM=; b=l r5G141vRk5xMyzRzQJyrrlevcM94YACzODSgfygVDJJIU9rl85vdhjFYG6iWB+0F 6OlJVCGndg8bAkoqbFT/dfs7V67JWkPcX5g6T6ySu4kcwN8cHa951cVFSeku7/KT gEcKZpi+sedfK/wBGvND5tehfYcuJXtPhJWPJ9PjVpC25aB54uBxlag49tyGbzmL nI7E9iyI3BKzcsdW8miz1RCXlOeFqd7Rs7iNYTFGLLA3RTlHnoN0DScQbDxLUWzh tLyuz7UaJS5mCCJxFtYEAocD7O0CGXInTvuv0QzG7CADOYmM9ZzFld+GKkbIXvJz IsPRuAbA4SGeIkA2KnwYg== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvledrfedvgddutddvucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepkfffgggfuffvvehfhfgjtgfgsehtjeertddtvdejnecuhfhrohhmpeffmhhi thhrhicuifhuthhovhcuoegumhhithhrhiesghhuthhovhdruggvvheqnecuggftrfgrth htvghrnhepteduleejgeehtefgheegjeekueehvdevieekueeftddvtdevfefhvdevgedu jeehnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepug hmihhtrhihsehguhhtohhvrdguvghv X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i0e71465a:Fastmail Original-Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Wed, 21 Feb 2024 12:38:57 -0500 (EST) Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: <87zfvtwy2w.fsf@posteo.net> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=66.111.4.29; envelope-from=dmitry@gutov.dev; helo=out5-smtp.messagingengine.com X-Spam_score_int: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:316420 Archived-At: On 21/02/2024 19:01, Philip Kaludercic wrote: > Dmitry Gutov writes: > >> On 20/02/2024 22:04, Dmitry Gutov wrote: >>> On 20/02/2024 13:48, Philip Kaludercic wrote: >>> >>>> If Flycheck were to use the same interface as Flymake, then the >>>> situation would be better, as it would only be a different UI with >>>> perhaps some other priorities. >>> Flycheck uses macros to define checkers and output parsers. Perhaps >>> one day those could expand to Flymake's functional interface under >>> the covers, but for that to happen, it would help a lot if we were >>> more welcoming. >> So, unless unless there is a strong objection from one of Emacs's head >> maintainers, I think I will commence Flycheck's addition to NonGNU in >> the next few days. > Before taking this step, can we please discuss the possibility of > creating a uniform interface? As mentioned in my previous message, this > is the crux of my complaint, and I don't even know what Bozhidar > position on the matter is. We've discussed it. Such possibility exists. If we're going to make the implementation of it as a prerequisite for merging, however, I imagine that's just not going to happen. Flycheck's contributors will go back to their own bubble, and we'll stay in ours. Those are my expectations both from experience, and from the current mood of the people involved.