[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH] Flymake support for C/C++

From: Reuben Thomas
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Flymake support for C/C++
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2017 12:22:13 +0100

On 14 October 2017 at 11:36, Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> wrote:
> From: Reuben Thomas <address@hidden>
> Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2017 09:29:52 +0100
> Cc: Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden>, Richard Stallman <address@hidden>,
>       Noam Postavsky <address@hiddennet>, Sami Kerola <address@hidden>, address@hidden,
>       João Távora <address@hidden>,
>       Alan Mackenzie <address@hidden>, Leo Liu <address@hidden>,
>       Stefan Monnier <address@hidden>
>  "...I'd rather let Flycheck die if no maintainer was left to work on it than moving it into Emacs..."
> ​It doesn't have to be moved, just as Org was not moved into Emacs, but continues to be maintained
> externally, and its sources imported.

You mean, import Flycheck over its developer's objections?

​Its developer seems to object to its becoming part of Emacs; I'm not suggesting that.​

It's the developer's legitimate
​ ​
right not to allow it.

(It's released under GPLv3+, so the developer can't disallow it. But it doesn't matter here, and maintaining good relations with upstream is of course important.)​

And even if we did, how will this work once
bug reports will come in, and we will expect/request the Flycheck
developers to handle them?

​As for any other external package (and with other packages such as Org and CEDET), bug reports should go to the package developers.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]