Re: [PATCH] Adding new schemas to nxml-mode

[Jostein Kjønigsen]

On 21 Feb 2024, at 04:01, Stefan Kangas <stefankangas@gmail.com> wrote:

Basically as a minimum make sure it works for more people than just me.

What happens if it doesn't "work" in this context?  Can it hurt or is it
just an extra feature that they won't benefit from?

In terms of “working" I would consider the following:

* The appropriate schemas are activated for the appropriate and expected files.

* The schemas, when activated, do not create warnings for correctly formatted XML-files (according to that schema).

In terms of NOT working, I would consider the following:

* A schema is activated for a file which it is not appropriate for.

* A schema, when activated for an appropriate file-type, flags correctly formatted XML-elements within that file as erroneous.

- I think this should also come with updates to etc/schemas/README
 describing the copyright and legal status of these new schemas.
 See that file to get an idea of what's needed.

I didn't know about that one. Will look into it!

- Does "Dotnet" also include "Mono" (or some other free software
 replacement)?  If yes, I think the commit message should say so
 explicitly, so that we mention both but advertise mainly the free
 version.  I.e. it should say "Mono/Dotnet" rather than "Dotnet/Mono".

Not going to go for a technical deep dive here, but in short:

- .NET Framework was a closed-source Windows only development platform created by Microsoft

- Mono is a open-source cross-platform reimplementation of .NET Framework

Today when one refers to .NET when typically refers to the “new” modern .NET project (with no “framework” suffix), which is both open-source and cross-platform. Modern .NET supersedes .NET Framework, and in many ways Mono as well.

While all file-types covered by schemas submitted here are relevant/applicable to all those three development platforms, as they all work on the same type of source-files and build-systems… I would argue that the “main” development target these days for any developer working on up to date tooling is going to be .NET, not Mono. As such, I think just referring to it as dotnet is appropriate.

- Should this be called out in NEWS?

It could. I have no opinion on how “big” a feature/change has to be before it’s considered newsworthy.

I’ll let more seasoned Emacs-contributors decide that, if that’s OK.

- (This should also have a proper ChangeLog in the commit message, of
 course.)

I thought I added a pretty decent one in my commit… Was that not included in the patch?

Or do you mean adding it to a ChangeLog file of some sort? If so, which one?

—
Kind Regards
Jostein Kjønigsen