Re: My perspective as a mid-level user on pros/cons of different editors

[Dmitry Gutov]

On 20.05.2020 18:23, Stefan Kangas wrote:

> > So, what's your opinion on how lsp-mode would react to that particular
> > rename, and how should we feel about that?
>
> They chose to be uncooperative, AFAIU?  Then where does that leave us?

Did they? These things are not so simple.

lsp-mode is not one person, some of them would likely want to be 
featured in GNU ELPA, but maybe others made it too hard.

And if we split ELPA in two parts, as is being discussed in another 
thread, it should be possible again (in the "extras" part, at least).

> Maybe the onus is on them to choose a name which will not obviously
> conflict with the support we will likely (or obviously) want in core.

I don't see any "obviously" here, but oh well.

> It is good that they developed lsp-mode, but it is disappointing that
> they have so light-heartedly dismissed the possibility of getting it
> into core or GNU ELPA.

Did anybody here actually talk to them about inclusion?

I'm guessing Stefan stopped at the "include s.el" step.

> If we agree that it is important to have lsp-support in core (my
> preference), or at least very easily installible through GNU ELPA, I
> don't see why we should worry at all about them somehow owning the
> prefix "lsp-".  Because they don't.

So we don't care about upsetting even the "friendly" developers among 
lsp-mode team, and either forcing them to rename the package (and thus 
breaking updates for all users who have the package installed), or 
creating general user confusion who would look at the lsp-mode's feature 
list, type 'M-x lsp-connect', and fail to see some of the features?