Re: Tree-sitter maturity

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2024 08:46:06 -0500
> From: Daniel Colascione <dancol@dancol.org>
> CC: rms@gnu.org, manphiz@gmail.com
> 
> >> It might take a while for that to happen, which is why I still believe
> >> it would be better if tree-sitter major modes would populate
> >> `treesit-language-source-alist' on their own, and point to the specific
> >> checkouts that the major mode developer tested their implementation
> >> against.
> >
> >We could have done that, but there's no way we could keep the value of
> >treesit-language-source-alist up-to-date, because the grammar
> >libraries put out new versions much more frequently than Emacs
> >releases, especially if you consider libraries that have no official
> >versions at all (in which case we can only point to some revision in
> >their repository).
> >
> >The question that bothers me is how useful is it to have
> >treesit-language-source-alist that is outdated?  What do we expect the
> >users to do with such an outdated value?
> >
> 
> Why not just vendor all the grammars with the Emacs modes that use them?

We'd need to ask their developers to agree to this.  Other than that,
I don't see how is that different from pointing to a specific version
of each grammar: both will be outdated a short time after we point to
the version or release Emacs with that version.

So why do you think this is better?