Re: PL support

[Dmitry Gutov]

On 10.05.2020 07:08, Clément Pit-Claudel wrote:

> > > > In principle, I disagree: as long as Eglot is maintained and works well, we*should*  
> > > > present it as "blessed", and we can do that in introduction videos, 
> > > > documentation, tutorials, etc.
> > > But why more than lsp-mode?
> >
> > Because they choose to participate in the "core" Emacs development very little?
>
> Oh? I thought we chose to exclude them by writing a competing package instead 
> of trying to bring them aboard.

We did what? I didn't write anything like that.

Only one person did, on his own volition. Then the package got added to 
ELPA on usual conditions.

> What does it mean for an external package to participate in the core Emacs 
> development?

Well, um, that would mean for individual authors to participate, I 
guess. Maybe contribute useful code as libraries. Example of another 
failed discussion: https://github.com/emacs-lsp/lsp-ui/issues/50

And for packages to be contributed to GNU ELPA, with the subsequent 
possibility of having useful bits extracted and generalized.

> > And because they chose not to get included in GNU ELPA, which would be a 
> > "reward" in itself (oob availability for new users). We couldn't mention 
> > packages not in GNU ELPA in documentation as prominently anyway.
>
> Really?  The only thing I could find is 
> https://github.com/emacs-lsp/lsp-mode/issues/83, where the general opinion is 
> that it would be good for lsp-mode to be in core, until they (mistakenly) seem 
> to conclude that eglot is in core already.  What am I missing?

You're missing the first sentence in the message you are looking at.

What do you expect? I'm tired of chasing people and asking them to 
contribute. Do you fault me not going there and asking again?

> > We couldn't mention packages not in GNU ELPA in documentation as prominently 
> > anyway.
>
> Why?  Is the policy that it's bad to endorse code not *owned* by the FSF?

We can't make adding MELPA to the archives list a part of an official 
tutorial. For multiple reasons, code ownership only one of them.