Re: [PATCH] Adding new schemas to nxml-mode

[Stefan Kangas <stefankangas@gmail.com>]

Jostein Kjønigsen <jostein@secure.kjonigsen.net> writes:

> With those encouraging words, I guess there’s no reason to be mucking
> about then.

Great!

> Attached is the patch with all schemas, and mappings for Emacs to
> apply them.

Thanks, please find some comments below.

> Basically as a minimum make sure it works for more people than just me.

What happens if it doesn't "work" in this context?  Can it hurt or is it
just an extra feature that they won't benefit from?

> From 318bc52c24308095662694aaea0feb2e4d640b32 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: =?UTF-8?q?Jostein=20Kj=C3=B8nigsen?= <jostein@kjonigsen.net>
> Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2024 21:54:14 +0100
> Subject: [PATCH] nxml-mode: Add schemas for .net related development
>  file-formats
>
> - MSBuild project files
> - Dotnet build properties files
> - Dotnet package properties files
> - Dotnet resource extension files
> - Dotnet Application config files
> - Nuget config file
> - Nuget package specification file
> - Nuget packages config file

- I think this should also come with updates to etc/schemas/README
  describing the copyright and legal status of these new schemas.
  See that file to get an idea of what's needed.
- Does "Dotnet" also include "Mono" (or some other free software
  replacement)?  If yes, I think the commit message should say so
  explicitly, so that we mention both but advertise mainly the free
  version.  I.e. it should say "Mono/Dotnet" rather than "Dotnet/Mono".
- Should this be called out in NEWS?
- (This should also have a proper ChangeLog in the commit message, of
  course.)