Re: Update on tree-sitter structure navigation

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>]

> Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2023 20:04:07 +0300
> Cc: casouri@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, danny@dfreeman.email,
>  theo@thornhill.no, jostein@secure.kjonigsen.net, dev@rjt.dev,
>  wkirschbaum@gmail.com, pedz@easesoftware.com
> From: Dmitry Gutov <dgutov@yandex.ru>
> 
> > How is it useful to ask users to use, say, 2-year old versions of
> > grammar libraries, especially for languages where either the language
> > or the library (or both) change quickly?
> 
> It would be better to use a 2-year-old grammar which works with our mode 
> than a new grammar which breaks our mode anyway.

But worse than using a 6-month-old grammar that doesn't break the mode
and has a lot of improvements.

> > How is it friendlier to downgrade to an older version (which would
> > require fetching it, building it with a C compiler, and installing it)
> > than to patch a single Lisp file?  Actually, people don't even need to
> > patch their Emacs installations, they could instead have a fixed
> > version of the Lisp file in their home directories or in site-lisp.
> 
> So we'll suggest they manually copy the latest version of xxx-js-mode.el 
> from master over to their site-lisp? That will be our recommendation in 
> case a grammar breaks?

Something like that, yes.  Or applying the diffs from the fix.

> I suppose we could publish all ts grammars in "core ELPA".

Yes, that could be a good solution, if nothing better comes up.