Re: [PATCH] Flymake support for C/C++

[Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>]

> Copyright assignment is a different matter:

Indeed.  By policy the Emacs project wants copyright assignments for the
code we distribute.  So in order to include flycheck in Emacs, we'd need
a copyright assignment, and AFAIK this is going to be difficult to get,
so by and large, the discussion to include flycheck ends here.

> It's really the question of where development happens that I'm
> interested in.

Once we decide to include a package, there are indeed many ways we can
do that:
A- just include in the tarball a copy of the code freshly downloaded
   from upstream.
B- keep a local branch tracking upstream and include that in the tarball
C- keep a local branch tracking upstream and publish it in GNU ELPA
D- keep a local copy in emacs.git tracking upstream
E- move upstream into elpa.git
F- move upstream into emacs.git
G- ...

I don't think (A) is a good option because it means distributing code over
which we don't have any control (this said, to some extent that's what
we do with the GNU ELPA version of Org, and indeed, I consider this as
a problem).

(C), (D), (E), and (F) are all common cases.

(B) is something I was hoping we'd be doing for Emacs-26 (well,
actually doing both B and C at the same time), but for some reason this
has not materialized yet.


        Stefan