|
From: | Dmitry Gutov |
Subject: | Re: PL support |
Date: | Sun, 10 May 2020 02:19:20 +0300 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.7.0 |
On 10.05.2020 01:23, Clément Pit-Claudel wrote:
On 09/05/2020 17.49, Dmitry Gutov wrote:On 09.05.2020 22:55, Clément Pit-Claudel wrote:Let's not be too hasty with calling the debate silly. I don't use either lsp-mode or eglot but I do see strong opinions in favor of both, and "blessing" one as official, especially a (currently) less popular one, can cause sour feelings and give the perception that emacs-devel is being insular.In principle, I disagree: as long as Eglot is maintained and works well, we*should* present it as "blessed", and we can do that in introduction videos, documentation, tutorials, etc.But why more than lsp-mode?
Because they choose to participate in the "core" Emacs development very little?
And because they chose not to get included in GNU ELPA, which would be a "reward" in itself (oob availability for new users). We couldn't mention packages not in GNU ELPA in documentation as prominently anyway.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |