From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Philip Kaludercic Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Adding Flycheck to NonGNU ELPA Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2024 17:01:43 +0000 Message-ID: <87zfvtwy2w.fsf@posteo.net> 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> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="18389"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: joakim@verona.se, Bozhidar Batsov , Emacs Devel , Stefan Monnier To: Dmitry Gutov Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Feb 21 18:05:26 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 1rcq28-0004Uk-OR for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 21 Feb 2024 18:05:24 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rcpyr-00083O-Cf; Wed, 21 Feb 2024 12:02:01 -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 1rcpyf-0007d0-Uh for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 21 Feb 2024 12:01:59 -0500 Original-Received: from mout02.posteo.de ([185.67.36.66]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rcpyd-0003H5-AF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 21 Feb 2024 12:01:48 -0500 Original-Received: from submission (posteo.de [185.67.36.169]) by mout02.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 251C6240101 for ; Wed, 21 Feb 2024 18:01:45 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017; t=1708534905; bh=moKcGr1yj4kW/FM4UeIQEPWEMzjNY9m1hPIocxLaXW0=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:OpenPGP:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version: Content-Type:From; b=aPKMKwLQjK08K6gTiGCyL/sGn4rPrvwJIqyn2rF/RJbgD9v3DoH4zHEBjGgT9JPsP w2dfoRoKM0lERBSEnu5RI0f9d82XobfHHtSY7K5CLUqxFg2hPP+aYpktU+Vt449Bq8 ti+dyzSE2QQsvdf43Hl3Fgb8j1ECuuM+OehE9sfDpPaZtOxiGCaWeFDMWe6jwiUEUL YwXBneEbd4nu+LO3JpqlyFQjOue8Z2osoSKIpfhmHWMuulj1WxOGSuYytaBe7wvu3R q4lMCTNRx3lotoqReifnykFi3KrdvcVTnMGDnzVEBB9clGOBeDB5q0+0AzYzKqSryW PsM/jX4trkgew== Original-Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4Tg2cS1Tnlz9rxP; Wed, 21 Feb 2024 18:01:43 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <69829f55-511b-4543-9a1b-938a5e8ac08c@gutov.dev> (Dmitry Gutov's message of "Wed, 21 Feb 2024 16:38:14 +0200") OpenPGP: id=7126E1DE2F0CE35C770BED01F2C3CC513DB89F66; url="https://keys.openpgp.org/vks/v1/by-fingerprint/7126E1DE2F0CE35C770BED01F2C3CC513DB89F66"; preference=signencrypt Received-SPF: pass client-ip=185.67.36.66; envelope-from=philipk@posteo.net; helo=mout02.posteo.de X-Spam_score_int: -43 X-Spam_score: -4.4 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.4 / 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_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=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:316418 Archived-At: 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.