From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Make all tree-sitter modes optional Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2023 17:04:57 +0200 Message-ID: <837cwg1gfa.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83h6x5xym7.fsf@gnu.org> <83h6wr6gmz.fsf@gnu.org> <868ri140sr.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <83fsc92gbz.fsf@gnu.org> <83cz6ccagy.fsf@gnu.org> <838rgzaqmj.fsf@gnu.org> <83pmaaaicy.fsf@gnu.org> <87y1owl8eg.fsf@yahoo.com> <87ttzkl6mw.fsf@yahoo.com> <83a61c1hjj.fsf@gnu.org> <20d7e0c0-d701-6672-4e6c-e005aac128db@yandex.ru> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="12788"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: luangruo@yahoo.com, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, acm@muc.de, juri@linkov.net, casouri@gmail.com, larsi@gnus.org, theo@thornhill.no, jostein@secure.kjonigsen.net, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Dmitry Gutov Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Feb 17 16:05:46 2023 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 1pT2Iz-00036S-9i for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 17 Feb 2023 16:05:45 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pT2II-0001aJ-MP; Fri, 17 Feb 2023 10:05:02 -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 1pT2IH-0001aB-TU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 17 Feb 2023 10:05:02 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pT2IF-0006C2-Op; Fri, 17 Feb 2023 10:04:59 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=7/0uZYEwZSWxTH5US4+jw9QBga/OsNn2MLUTzHZA06g=; b=VbV3vBkWb+B+ r+PJLKQuuQZry3hWt7Ks4dozxb98SUHo7HbQuJV0jlxIL8V/0SJQqUvsP/DP69W4j8ONp+MFTzzAr 1Eum+8Kr4FCVzQPYJRWzSitOoxjfcW5e1A2ZsJh6cKUxeEZ/ejIaWyNCAJ+KFZdyRG0QCjNI3jGw7 BqbCjbtHPKXW61YHM5HVqwRyn3CSnGM9J9joT4WvNEekaWeZG7YfAOl6iq/Z0vloerbbA4H0nLtvb vSQVPSL/RtG6xV9nxmuFTSjLNjW+SDDydqzMaMLb3ZDjk7Udh5e3Udptqt/A04ZYaR4zl/DJ1zbXD o6XHbAZ3wzDvpzdZO2tgww==; Original-Received: from [87.69.77.57] (helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pT2IF-0006LR-8J; Fri, 17 Feb 2023 10:04:59 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20d7e0c0-d701-6672-4e6c-e005aac128db@yandex.ru> (message from Dmitry Gutov on Fri, 17 Feb 2023 16:56:51 +0200) 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:303492 Archived-At: > Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2023 16:56:51 +0200 > Cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, acm@muc.de, juri@linkov.net, casouri@gmail.com, > larsi@gnus.org, theo@thornhill.no, jostein@secure.kjonigsen.net, > emacs-devel@gnu.org > From: Dmitry Gutov > > I just don't understand what's your plan here regarding Emacs 29. What's > going to happen next? What kind of feedback will you be looking for? Whatever feedback we will get. I don't know what we will hear, and I'm not sure why I should try guessing. > What I think will happen, is people will try out the new modes, some > will suffer the inconveniences we warned about here and possibly think > less of Emacs as a result; others will avoid those problems by accident; > yet a lot more users will never try these new modes and thus avoid the > problems as well. > > If we're lucky, we get a couple of new bug reports associated with it, > maybe 1-6 months after the release: a lot of users don't report > problems, much less these less obvious ones, where the behavior doesn't > end up in a "error" written somewhere. The reports will likely repeat > some of what's already been said. Something like that, yes. Except that the 6-month figurer could be better (or worse), and some of the reports might actually tell us something that wasn't yet said or proposed. > At what point does this turn into some kind of conclusion, and a > teaching moment, so to speak? It depends on what we hear. It is quite possible that a single report will show the light. Or a significant number of reports expressing a particular opinion will change the weight of that opinion. Or something else. (Or I step down, or am overrun by a bus.)