Re: [NonGNU ELPA] New package: flymake-guile

[Philip Kaludercic]

Distopico <distopico@riseup.net> writes:

> On 2023-08-31, Philip Kaludercic <philipk@posteo.net> wrote:
>
>> Distopico <distopico@riseup.net> writes:
>>
>>> On 2023-08-31, Philip Kaludercic <philipk@posteo.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Distopico <distopico@riseup.net> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi all!
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm the author of a new package `flymake-guile` and I
>>>>> would like to include it in Nongnu ELPA.
>>>>
>>>> Just to be sure, you are sure you don't want to include your package in
>>>> GNU ELPA?
>>>>
>>>>> Here the repo: https://framagit.org/flymake-backends/flymake-guile
>>>>
>>>> I am not familiar with the "flymake-quickdef" package, but it doesn't
>>>> seem to be much shorter than just defining a regular flymake backend.
>>>> As there have been some discussions wrt providing a kind of DSL for
>>>> Flymake backends, I am not sure if adding flymake-quickdef would be that
>>>> constructive at this point.  Would you consider updating your package to
>>>> not use the dependency?  You can check out other flymake-... modes in
>>>> GNU and NonGNU ELPA for inspiration.
>>>>
>>> Thank you for your feedback, For now I'm fine sending it to NonGNU ELPA,
>>> and for now I would like to keep `flymake-quickdef`, I have plans to
>>> write other backend and I don't wanna repeat the same validations and
>>> code over and over, I'll switch to the DLS when it is implemented.
>>
>> FWIW it already exists in this form 
>> https://github.com/mohkale/flymake-collection.
>>
>> And just to make sure, you are certain you want to implement this on top
>> of a DSL?  I have to admit that I am really not a fan of the way that
>> flymake-quickdef is implemented, but one redeeming feature appears to be
>> that you could macroexpand it away, then clean the code up.
>>
>
> flymake-collection use an adaptation of flymake-quickdef[1], that is
> a macro similar to the quickdef one[2], could be use quickdef a blocker
> to add the package on NonGNU ELPA?

I am afraid I don't understand your question.