From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Adding Flycheck to NonGNU ELPA Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2024 13:14:35 -0500 Message-ID: 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> <706be920-cbd4-42d8-8c76-3abdb7e7b026@gutov.dev> <87edd5wv59.fsf@posteo.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="6649"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Cc: Dmitry Gutov , joakim@verona.se, Bozhidar Batsov , Emacs Devel To: Philip Kaludercic Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Feb 21 19:17:23 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 1rcr9n-0001Wc-0U for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 21 Feb 2024 19:17:23 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rcr8p-0003NK-9P; Wed, 21 Feb 2024 13:16:23 -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 1rcr8n-0003Jh-UJ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 21 Feb 2024 13:16:21 -0500 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rcr8m-0002Ku-2R for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 21 Feb 2024 13:16:21 -0500 Original-Received: from pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 553EF442888; Wed, 21 Feb 2024 13:16:17 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1708539376; bh=JIDziPvxln/fY0hB46y7hXeIKzPLmyQH0QwE1y/2ysE=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=jggEURLr3MJhw2IDXf8Sd3FtZwwmmRQ9827I7vwDq7GbzPEYtr3FV1QA3V96zpvbI z5JyPLfvy77mZkuOQ7X5nltrfYYyxtDTuCOs7b6OFF0AAIX1OK0E8YwNouzI6FSno5 IQvKOToxCgsKBROzhkZhO9w7MIFaOd7roMqS73azcjxi6DdndXrSV6cQT7JGgF6rY0 wsQwFwQXGbhGNUFwqHZzTCXFBiHLLnjLStS5zI+jBHHTQdnxs1Ne+a2cVjxPiSxIa5 9dvnInic3xwWKJIsMPCPTMk20fq7JZWGo8IYdAuKWaLCKjhZXdS03ok2rdJ6Iv9RRK IH8fVbw38fQBA== Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 290B344287F; Wed, 21 Feb 2024 13:16:16 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from lechazo (lechon.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.27.242]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1779D120426; Wed, 21 Feb 2024 13:16:16 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <87edd5wv59.fsf@posteo.net> (Philip Kaludercic's message of "Wed, 21 Feb 2024 18:05:06 +0000") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-Spam_score_int: -42 X-Spam_score: -4.3 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, 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:316425 Archived-At: >>> Before taking this step, can we please discuss the possibility of >>> creating a uniform interface? >> That's orthogonal. > Not if the Flycheck maintainers have no interest, or are even opposed to > it. Of course it's orthogonal. Flycheck is a package that's well-written, popular, well-maintained, and that respects the users's freedom, so there's no reason not to include it in NonGNU ELPA, regardless if it comes with some bridge for Flymake. But I'll grant you that it's not 100% orthogonal: If we want to get a uniform interface between the two, the first thing to do would be to encourage cooperation rather than to put up barriers, so including it in NonGNU ELPA could help. Stefan