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

["Jostein Kjønigsen" <jostein@secure.kjonigsen.net>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2750 bytes --]



> On 21 Feb 2024, at 04:01, Stefan Kangas <stefankangas@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> 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?

In terms of “working" I would consider the following:

* The appropriate schemas are activated for the appropriate and expected files.
* The schemas, when activated, do not create warnings for correctly formatted XML-files (according to that schema).

In terms of NOT working, I would consider the following:

* A schema is activated for a file which it is not appropriate for.
* A schema, when activated for an appropriate file-type, flags correctly formatted XML-elements within that file as erroneous.

> - 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.

I didn't know about that one. Will look into it!

> - 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".

Not going to go for a technical deep dive here, but in short:

- .NET Framework was a closed-source Windows only development platform created by Microsoft
- Mono is a open-source cross-platform reimplementation of .NET Framework

Today when one refers to .NET when typically refers to the “new” modern .NET project (with no “framework” suffix), which is both open-source and cross-platform. Modern .NET supersedes .NET Framework, and in many ways Mono as well.

While all file-types covered by schemas submitted here are relevant/applicable to all those three development platforms, as they all work on the same type of source-files and build-systems… I would argue that the “main” development target these days for any developer working on up to date tooling is going to be .NET, not Mono. As such, I think just referring to it as dotnet is appropriate.

> - Should this be called out in NEWS?

It could. I have no opinion on how “big” a feature/change has to be before it’s considered newsworthy.

I’ll let more seasoned Emacs-contributors decide that, if that’s OK.

> - (This should also have a proper ChangeLog in the commit message, of
>  course.)


I thought I added a pretty decent one in my commit… Was that not included in the patch?

Or do you mean adding it to a ChangeLog file of some sort? If so, which one?


—
Kind Regards
Jostein Kjønigsen

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3766 bytes --]