In addition to the philosophical reason, there's an effort-based reason,
and then there's the fact that it's a nasty combinatorics problem. Pick a
version of emacs (26 vs. 27 matters, although the setups probably don't
differ too much), then:
 for each language you want to support, (many)
 for each OS/version, (at least 3)
 for each method of installing non-elisp packages, (varies from "a couple"
to "half-dozen plus")
you *still* often have choices to make. This is probably also why the
typical "external tool install method" is a documentation line that says
something like "install ripgrep" or "make sure python-shell-interpreter and
py-shell-name are both set to python 3".


On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 2:55 AM ndame <ndame@protonmail.com> wrote:

> > As a user, I really want to be able to jump to
> > eclaration/implementation/find references/get completion to work etc. I
> > ouldn't care as slightest how it is implemented as long as it worked
> > ell. Unfortunately (or fortunately) I know all the minutiae details on
> > ow it works in my copy of Emacs since I had to install each and every
> > acakge and configure them all together to get that working for me.
> > hich indeed took quite some time untill I learned what I need, how to
> > onfigure it and finally how to use it.
>
> As you did it already how hard would it be you think to create a package
> which does this automatically?
>
> I'm wondering why somebody hasn't made this already.
>
> I don't mean a package in ELPA, but rather in MELPA, so the package is not
> restricted from downloading and installing a server, etc it could do
> anything what is needed to set up the configuration. Why aren't there
> packages for various languages which set up the completion/go to definition
> stuff automatically? Is there a technical problem?
>