Re: PL support

[João Távora]

On Sat, May 9, 2020 at 8:55 PM Clément Pit-Claudel
<address@hidden> wrote:
> > Exactly why I think a working end-to-end solution will have a much
> > better chance of resolving the dispute.
>
> Let's not be too hasty with calling the debate silly.

Sorry, I _will_ call this debate silly here and now, because this is
not an adversarial situation at all. This is about making a package
that is in GNU Elpa and works tightly with packages in Emacs
easier to develop _for its developers_: not about "recommending"
one over the other because it's "better" or more popular. It's
not like this will make life any harder for lsp-mode lovers or
developers, or anyone.  That just doesn't make sense. In fact,
the presence of LSP code in the core, if done correctly, can
even benefit them.

You want to add lsp-mode to core, be my guest: if the
developers think that will be beneficial to both.

> If there are two great options and both are one click away
> after starting Emacs, is there really a problem in need of solving?

As a user (or rather a not-yet-user-of-neither as you say)
you see no problem. And you will continue to see no problems.
But for this developer, there is a problem.

João