GNU bug report logs - #17030
CEDET EDE documentation mentions android project, but not in tree

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 17030 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 17030 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Daniel Colascione <dancol <at> dancol.org>
To: bug-emacs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>
Subject: CEDET EDE documentation mentions android project, but not in tree
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2014 17:14:00 -0700

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

The CEDET documentation for EDE mentions ede-android-project, but this
facility is absent from the version of CEDET in mainline. It is,
however, present in the standalone CEDET distribution.

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]

Message #10 received at 17030-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: David Engster <deng <at> randomsample.de>
To: Daniel Colascione <dancol <at> dancol.org>
Cc: 17030-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#17030: CEDET EDE documentation mentions android project,
 but not in tree
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 08:17:04 +0100

Daniel Colascione writes:
> The CEDET documentation for EDE mentions ede-android-project, but this
> facility is absent from the version of CEDET in mainline. It is,
> however, present in the standalone CEDET distribution.

Yes, thank you. I removed that node as well as references to
ede-java-root-project and ede-arduino, which are also only upstream.

-David

Message #13 received at 17030-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Daniel Colascione <dancol <at> dancol.org>
To: David Engster <deng <at> randomsample.de>
Cc: 17030-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#17030: CEDET EDE documentation mentions android project,
 but not in tree
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 00:19:07 -0700

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On 03/18/2014 12:17 AM, David Engster wrote:
> Daniel Colascione writes:
>> The CEDET documentation for EDE mentions ede-android-project, but this
>> facility is absent from the version of CEDET in mainline. It is,
>> however, present in the standalone CEDET distribution.
> 
> Yes, thank you. I removed that node as well as references to
> ede-java-root-project and ede-arduino, which are also only upstream.
> 

Thanks. Why *aren't* these facilities in mainline, though?

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]

Message #16 received at 17030-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: David Engster <deng <at> randomsample.de>
To: Daniel Colascione <dancol <at> dancol.org>
Cc: 17030-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#17030: CEDET EDE documentation mentions android project,
 but not in tree
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 08:32:06 +0100

Daniel Colascione writes:
> On 03/18/2014 12:17 AM, David Engster wrote:
>> Daniel Colascione writes:
>>> The CEDET documentation for EDE mentions ede-android-project, but this
>>> facility is absent from the version of CEDET in mainline. It is,
>>> however, present in the standalone CEDET distribution.
>> 
>> Yes, thank you. I removed that node as well as references to
>> ede-java-root-project and ede-arduino, which are also only upstream.
>> 
>
> Thanks. Why *aren't* these facilities in mainline, though?

Because I'm not sure whether they are generally usable. Those features
haven't received much testing and are often honed to one specific setup.

-David

Message #19 received at 17030-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Dmitry Gutov <dgutov <at> yandex.ru>
To: Daniel Colascione <dancol <at> dancol.org>
Cc: 17030-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#17030: CEDET EDE documentation mentions android project,
 but not in tree
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 09:42:07 +0200

David Engster <deng <at> randomsample.de> writes:

> Because I'm not sure whether they are generally usable. Those features
> haven't received much testing and are often honed to one specific setup.

Do you expect them to get much testing while not being included in Emacs?

As long as they don't eat users' files, I'd release them as-is and then
collect bug reports. This would've been better performed earlier in the
24.4 release cycle, though.

Message #22 received at 17030-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: David Engster <deng <at> randomsample.de>
To: Dmitry Gutov <dgutov <at> yandex.ru>
Cc: 17030-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Daniel Colascione <dancol <at> dancol.org>
Subject: Re: bug#17030: CEDET EDE documentation mentions android project,
 but not in tree
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 09:19:50 +0100

Dmitry Gutov writes:
> David Engster <deng <at> randomsample.de> writes:
>
>> Because I'm not sure whether they are generally usable. Those features
>> haven't received much testing and are often honed to one specific setup.
>
> Do you expect them to get much testing while not being included in Emacs?

No, but it's better than merging half-baked code and waiting for bug
reports which probably won't get fixed.

> As long as they don't eat users' files, I'd release them as-is and then
> collect bug reports.

That doesn't work because there are not enough CEDET developers. Our
resources are stretched thin with maintaining the stuff that is already
in Emacs, so I'm not inclined to merge more, largely untested code which
I myself don't use.

However, if someone volunteers to act as maintainer for one those
packages, I'd merge them, although whoever wants to maintain the Android
project should make sure the head of the FSF is OK with it being in
Emacs, and I can't imagine anyone eager to start that discussion...

-David

Message #25 received at 17030-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Dmitry Gutov <dgutov <at> yandex.ru>
To: David Engster <deng <at> randomsample.de>
Cc: 17030-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Daniel Colascione <dancol <at> dancol.org>
Subject: Re: bug#17030: CEDET EDE documentation mentions android project,
 but not in tree
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2014 17:43:36 +0200

On 18.03.2014 10:19, David Engster wrote:

> That doesn't work because there are not enough CEDET developers. Our
> resources are stretched thin with maintaining the stuff that is already
> in Emacs, so I'm not inclined to merge more, largely untested code which
> I myself don't use.

I see. But why not merge db-javap.el, at least? And maybe related code.

Do you think Alex isn't going to support it?

> whoever wants to maintain the Android
> project should make sure the head of the FSF is OK with it being in
> Emacs, and I can't imagine anyone eager to start that discussion...

I think CEDET really needs to move to ELPA. Even if Richard would object 
to distributing some code via GNU ELPA (but, as you can notice, 
company-clang is still there, for now), the additional features 
shouldn't be too hard to modularize and distribute separately.

Message #28 received at 17030-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: David Engster <deng <at> randomsample.de>
To: Dmitry Gutov <dgutov <at> yandex.ru>
Cc: 17030-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#17030: CEDET EDE documentation mentions android project,
 but not in tree
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2014 17:45:16 +0100

Dmitry Gutov writes:
> On 18.03.2014 10:19, David Engster wrote:
>
>> That doesn't work because there are not enough CEDET developers. Our
>> resources are stretched thin with maintaining the stuff that is already
>> in Emacs, so I'm not inclined to merge more, largely untested code which
>> I myself don't use.
>
> I see. But why not merge db-javap.el, at least? And maybe related code.

Do you use it? Last time I tried it (2012 or so), Java support had lots
of problems.

> Do you think Alex isn't going to support it?

I don't know. From what I can see in the logs, work on it has stalled.

>> whoever wants to maintain the Android
>> project should make sure the head of the FSF is OK with it being in
>> Emacs, and I can't imagine anyone eager to start that discussion...
>
> I think CEDET really needs to move to ELPA.

Maybe. That'd be worth discussing as soon as someone volunteers to do
the work.

-David

Message #31 received at 17030-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Dmitry Gutov <dgutov <at> yandex.ru>
To: David Engster <deng <at> randomsample.de>
Cc: 17030-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#17030: CEDET EDE documentation mentions android project,
 but not in tree
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2014 19:16:17 +0200

On 20.03.2014 18:45, David Engster wrote:
> Do you use it? Last time I tried it (2012 or so), Java support had lots
> of problems.

I at least would have properly tried it if it were in the core 
distribution (or if it were distributed separately all the time; the 
pre-loading approach is too ugly for my taste to keep in the init file).

I haven't been using Java for quite a while, but it's a language I can 
see myself returning to in the future more likely than C/C++.

So it could be a likely entry point to the CEDET codebase, for me or 
someone else.

>> Do you think Alex isn't going to support it?
>
> I don't know. From what I can see in the logs, work on it has stalled.

That's too bad. On the other hand, the only related issue I could find 
(https://github.com/alexott/cedet/issues/1) is fixed and closed.

>> I think CEDET really needs to move to ELPA.
>
> Maybe. That'd be worth discussing as soon as someone volunteers to do
> the work.

Ok.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.