Feature request: CMake-mode

Feature request: CMake-mode

[Ergus]

Hi:

I have just noticed that Emacs does not have any native mode for cmake,
not even in elpa. And cmake is becomming more and more popular these
days.

There is a package in melpa which is very poorly maintained by the
cmake community.

https://melpa.org/packages/cmake-mode-20190710.1319.el
https://github.com/Kitware/CMake/blob/master/Auxiliary/cmake-mode.el

But it is indeed very poor and limited compared to others like:

https://melpa.org/#/cmake-font-lock

and produces some conflicts when interacting.

Could we consider to add a native cmake mode to vanilla or contact the
Kitware people to add this one to elpa? Or in the worst case to change
the name of their package in order to release the name and add a GPL
versioned one to elpa?

Best,
Ergus

Re: Feature request: CMake-mode

[Óscar Fuentes]

Ergus <spacibba@aol.com> writes:

> Hi:
>
> I have just noticed that Emacs does not have any native mode for cmake,
> not even in elpa. And cmake is becomming more and more popular these
> days.

Yes.

> There is a package in melpa which is very poorly maintained by the
> cmake community.
>
> https://melpa.org/packages/cmake-mode-20190710.1319.el
> https://github.com/Kitware/CMake/blob/master/Auxiliary/cmake-mode.el

And you think that we would do better? :-)

> But it is indeed very poor and limited compared to others like:
>
> https://melpa.org/#/cmake-font-lock

This one just adds advanced syntax highlighting, it does not provide
indentation, etc.

> and produces some conflicts when interacting.

Those are bugs, because its README says

  This package is designed to be used together with a major mode for
  editing CMake files.

and then goes on explicitly mentioning Kitware's mode.

> Could we consider to add a native cmake mode to vanilla or contact the
> Kitware people to add this one to elpa? Or in the worst case to change
> the name of their package in order to release the name and add a GPL
> versioned one to elpa?

CMake releases new versions quite often, so an elpa package (not to
mention a vanilla one) would soon be outdated unless someone (TM)
commits to keeping it up to date.

I've interacted with the Kitware guys on the distant past and I *guess*
that they would be glad to put their mode on elpa, but the relicensing
and paper signing are not straightforward because right now I see 11
contributors to that source file and most of them are not Kitware
employees. Isn't there a new elpa repository for non-GNU packages? That
would make this issue irrelevant.

Re: Feature request: CMake-mode

[Ergus]

On Fri, Oct 02, 2020 at 02:25:57AM +0200, �scar Fuentes wrote:
>Ergus <spacibba@aol.com> writes:
>
>> Hi:
>>
>> I have just noticed that Emacs does not have any native mode for cmake,
>> not even in elpa. And cmake is becomming more and more popular these
>> days.
>
>Yes.
>
>> There is a package in melpa which is very poorly maintained by the
>> cmake community.
>>
>> https://melpa.org/packages/cmake-mode-20190710.1319.el
>> https://github.com/Kitware/CMake/blob/master/Auxiliary/cmake-mode.el
>
>And you think that we would do better? :-)
>
The package seems not really very maintained.

>> But it is indeed very poor and limited compared to others like:
>>
>> https://melpa.org/#/cmake-font-lock
>
>This one just adds advanced syntax highlighting, it does not provide
>indentation, etc.
>
Well, it is indeed better than the other. Also the other one covers
indentation decently fine.

But also the implementation of this one is much more complete.

>> and produces some conflicts when interacting.
>
>Those are bugs, because its README says
>
>  This package is designed to be used together with a major mode for
>  editing CMake files.
>
>and then goes on explicitly mentioning Kitware's mode.
>
Actually the problem is that part of the work the package does is
supposed to be implemented in the major mode not in a minor mode. Look
at this issue and the final comments:

https://github.com/Lindydancer/cmake-font-lock/issues/9

It has a similar issue with packages like rainbow.

>> Could we consider to add a native cmake mode to vanilla or contact the
>> Kitware people to add this one to elpa? Or in the worst case to change
>> the name of their package in order to release the name and add a GPL
>> versioned one to elpa?
>
>CMake releases new versions quite often, so an elpa package (not to
>mention a vanilla one) would soon be outdated unless someone (TM)
>commits to keeping it up to date.
>
That's true. But actually the Kitware file supports only the most basic
keywords. Most of the new features, and syntax are not included there
any way.

>I've interacted with the Kitware guys on the distant past and I *guess*
>that they would be glad to put their mode on elpa, but the relicensing
>and paper signing are not straightforward because right now I see 11
>contributors to that source file and most of them are not Kitware
>employees. Isn't there a new elpa repository for non-GNU packages? That
>would make this issue irrelevant.
>

Re: Feature request: CMake-mode

[Óscar Fuentes]

Ergus <spacibba@aol.com> writes:

>>> There is a package in melpa which is very poorly maintained by the
>>> cmake community.
>>>
>>> https://melpa.org/packages/cmake-mode-20190710.1319.el
>>> https://github.com/Kitware/CMake/blob/master/Auxiliary/cmake-mode.el
>>
>>And you think that we would do better? :-)
>>
> The package seems not really very maintained.

[snip]

>>> Could we consider to add a native cmake mode to vanilla or contact the
>>> Kitware people to add this one to elpa? Or in the worst case to change
>>> the name of their package in order to release the name and add a GPL
>>> versioned one to elpa?
>>
>>CMake releases new versions quite often, so an elpa package (not to
>>mention a vanilla one) would soon be outdated unless someone (TM)
>>commits to keeping it up to date.
>>
> That's true. But actually the Kitware file supports only the most basic
> keywords. Most of the new features, and syntax are not included there
> any way.

So are you requesting to include Kitware's incomplete cmake-mode.el into
Elpa/Emacs or to develop a new mode (possibly based on Kitware's)? If
people is not contributing enough to Kitware's mode what makes you think
that once included into Emacs (with its added requirements about signing
papers, etc) it would be better?