Re: ruby-mode?

Re: ruby-mode?

[Seiji Zenitani]

Hi,

In November 2005, I contacted both ruby-mode authors and RMS.
Ruby-mode authors agreed, but it was postponed because Emacs 22 was
coming near. One year has passed since then. Considering its
importance, I think it's time to include ruby-mode.

Seiji Zenitani
zenitani@mac.com

Re: ruby-mode?

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2006 15:43:41 +0900
> From: "Seiji Zenitani" <zenitani@gmail.com>
> 
> In November 2005, I contacted both ruby-mode authors and RMS.
> Ruby-mode authors agreed, but it was postponed because Emacs 22 was
> coming near. One year has passed since then. Considering its
> importance, I think it's time to include ruby-mode.

FWIW, I don't see why Emacs 22 release is of any importance for the
decision whether to include ruby-mode, unless ruby-mode requires
changes in other parts of Emacs.  If no such additional changes are
required, inclusion of ruby-mode cannot possibly hurt anything, since
this is a new feature that didn't exist before.

Re: ruby-mode?

[David Kastrup]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

>> Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2006 15:43:41 +0900
>> From: "Seiji Zenitani" <zenitani@gmail.com>
>> 
>> In November 2005, I contacted both ruby-mode authors and RMS.
>> Ruby-mode authors agreed, but it was postponed because Emacs 22 was
>> coming near. One year has passed since then. Considering its
>> importance, I think it's time to include ruby-mode.
>
> FWIW, I don't see why Emacs 22 release is of any importance for the
> decision whether to include ruby-mode, unless ruby-mode requires
> changes in other parts of Emacs.  If no such additional changes are
> required, inclusion of ruby-mode cannot possibly hurt anything, since
> this is a new feature that didn't exist before.

Well, strictly speaking, we would not want to have Emacs hang (for
example while font-locking) when it opens a Ruby file, even if it
means opening it in Fundamental Mode.

However, since ruby-mode.el has presumably been used by a non-zero
number of users this last year, I don't think that this catastrophic
scenario is probable enough to prefer having Emacs 22 without a
dedicated Ruby mode.

So Seiji, do you know whether the assignment process was done at that
time?  If it wasn't, that's something we should really do now.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: ruby-mode?

[Seiji Zenitani]

On 2006/11/18, at 21:04, David Kastrup wrote:
> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
>>> Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2006 15:43:41 +0900
>>> From: "Seiji Zenitani" <zenitani@gmail.com>
>>>
>>> In November 2005, I contacted both ruby-mode authors and RMS.
>>> Ruby-mode authors agreed, but it was postponed because Emacs 22 was
>>> coming near. One year has passed since then. Considering its
>>> importance, I think it's time to include ruby-mode.
>>
>> FWIW, I don't see why Emacs 22 release is of any importance for the
>> decision whether to include ruby-mode, unless ruby-mode requires
>> changes in other parts of Emacs.  If no such additional changes are
>> required, inclusion of ruby-mode cannot possibly hurt anything, since
>> this is a new feature that didn't exist before.
>
> Well, strictly speaking, we would not want to have Emacs hang (for
> example while font-locking) when it opens a Ruby file, even if it
> means opening it in Fundamental Mode.
>
> However, since ruby-mode.el has presumably been used by a non-zero
> number of users this last year, I don't think that this catastrophic
> scenario is probable enough to prefer having Emacs 22 without a
> dedicated Ruby mode.
>
> So Seiji, do you know whether the assignment process was done at that
> time?  If it wasn't, that's something we should really do now.
>
At that time, no assignment process was done, but authors were  
favorable to provide ruby-mode. How about contacting ruby-developers  
mailing list <ruby-dev@ruby-lang.org>?  Two authors join this list.

==
Seiji Zenitani
zenitani@gmail.com

Re: ruby-mode?

[Richard Stallman]

It is true that we have added other things since last November.
However, now we are realy in pretest.  I don't think we should
add a new mode now.

Re: ruby-mode?

[David Kastrup]

Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:

> It is true that we have added other things since last November.
> However, now we are realy in pretest.  I don't think we should
> add a new mode now.

Pity.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: ruby-mode?

[Stefan Monnier]

> It is true that we have added other things since last November.
> However, now we are realy in pretest.  I don't think we should
> add a new mode now.

But it's never too early to start collecting the copyright assignments,
especially for projects who have several contributors.


        Stefan

Re: ruby-mode?

[David Kastrup]

Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes:

>> It is true that we have added other things since last November.
>> However, now we are realy in pretest.  I don't think we should
>> add a new mode now.
>
> But it's never too early to start collecting the copyright
> assignments, especially for projects who have several contributors.

Well, collecting assignments is not going to hit much enthusiasm if
you tell people at the same time that they should expect a few years
before they actually get to see their code in any release.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

ruby-mode?

[David Kastrup]

Hi,

Ruby is a language that has become pretty popular.  Emacs currently
does not have a mode for it.  There is a Ruby mode distributed from
the Ruby developers themselves.

Would it make sense to ask the developers whether they'd consider an
assignment to the FSF so that we could support Ruby out of the box?

I have not yet tried this mode so I can't vouch for its quality.  I'd
suppose it would be better than Fundamental Mode, though.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: ruby-mode?

[Lennart Borgman]

David Kastrup wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Ruby is a language that has become pretty popular.  Emacs currently
> does not have a mode for it.  There is a Ruby mode distributed from
> the Ruby developers themselves.
>
> Would it make sense to ask the developers whether they'd consider an
> assignment to the FSF so that we could support Ruby out of the box?
>   
Yes, I think it would be good to ask (though I have never used ruby myself).

Re: ruby-mode?

[Richard Stallman]

    Would it make sense to ask the developers whether they'd consider an
    assignment to the FSF so that we could support Ruby out of the box?

Please ask them if you wish.  But we should also look for an Emacs expert
who understands what a good programming language mode should do,
and also knows and uses Ruby, to comment for us on how well that mode
meets its expectations.