Agreed. Maybe a first step would be to get copyright assignments and
include the tree sitter module in GNU ELPA?
If I read some of these mails correctly it seems like that wouldn't be
possible due to interest from some of the parties involved in the main
package. I don't know the details on that, though.
Before we start a parallel effort, we definitely should make every effort
to get copyright assignments for the existing code. Maybe we can't take
the package as-is because some contributors won't accept to sign the
paperwork, but we can probably get paperwork for a significant fraction
of the code.
That would already help reduce duplicated efforts.
This is very important, not just to reduce the amount of work, but also
to avoid alienating interested parties.
And Eli seems unhappy with what's there.
That doesn't mean we have to start over from scratch.
As for making a little more concrete proposal for how to move forward,
would this be something like what we want?
- create/use c or rust bindings
I think we'd want to link to the C API of tree-sitter.
There's no point going through Rust at this point, AFAICT.
- create an elisp-layer for interaction with the parse tree
- hook fontification and indentation into that elisp-layer
Sounds about right.
Stefan