Re: [NonGNU ELPA] New package: flymake-guile

[Distopico <distopico@riseup.net>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2266 bytes --]


On 2023-08-31, Philip Kaludercic <philipk@posteo.net> wrote:

> Distopico <distopico@riseup.net> writes:
>
>> Hi all!
>>
>> I'm the author of a new package `flymake-guile` and I
>> would like to include it in Nongnu ELPA.
>
> Just to be sure, you are sure you don't want to include your package in
> GNU ELPA?
>
>> Here the repo: https://framagit.org/flymake-backends/flymake-guile
>
> I am not familiar with the "flymake-quickdef" package, but it doesn't
> seem to be much shorter than just defining a regular flymake backend.
> As there have been some discussions wrt providing a kind of DSL for
> Flymake backends, I am not sure if adding flymake-quickdef would be that
> constructive at this point.  Would you consider updating your package to
> not use the dependency?  You can check out other flymake-... modes in
> GNU and NonGNU ELPA for inspiration.
>
Thank you for your feedback, For now I'm fine sending it to NonGNU ELPA,
and for now I would like to keep `flymake-quickdef`, I have plans to
write other backend and I don't wanna repeat the same validations and
code over and over, I'll switch to the DLS when it is implemented.

>> ;;; Commentary:
>>
>> ;; Flymake backend for GNU Guile using `guild' compile.
>> ;;
>> ;; Usage:
>> ;;   (require 'flymake-guile)
>> ;;   (add-hook 'scheme-mode-hook 'flymake-guile)
>
> It would probably make sense to autoload the `flymake-guile' function,
> so that it is not necessary to require it in a user configuration.
>
It already have autoload, I just update the commentary there.

>
> Are you sure the README.md is right thing to include here?  It includes
> installation instructions, that are usually redundant when you install
> the package using package.el.  I would recommend writing out the
> "Commentary" section in flymake-guile.el with a brief description of
> what package and its entry points.
>
> Also, the package appears to include files that needn't be distributed
> in the release tarball, such as .envrc and guix.scm.  It would be nice
> if you could track these and future files of this type in a .elpaignore
> file, to instruct the build server that they should be removed before
> packaging.
>
Updated in the last version ignoring those file and removing the README
declaration.

Thank you!

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 515 bytes --]