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

[Eli Zaretskii]

> 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@hidden>, 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?  I very
much doubt we'd want to do that.  It's the developer's legitimate
right not to allow it.  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?

I simply don't see how something like that can work well enough for us
to make it the endorsed solution.