GNU bug report logs - #68386
[PATCH] gnu: Add emacs-vhdl-mode.

Previous Next

Full log

Message #28 received at 68386 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com>
To: Cayetano Santos <csantosb <at> inventati.org>
Cc: 68386 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#68386] [PATCH v1] gnu: Add emacs-vhdl-mode.
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2024 14:39:27 -0500

Hi Cayetano,

Cayetano Santos <csantosb <at> inventati.org> writes:

>>mer. 17 janv. 2024 at 09:08, Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Cayetano Santos <csantosb <at> inventati.org> writes:
>>
>>>>dim. 14 janv. 2024 at 21:46, Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Since there already is a 'vhdl-mode' package shipped with Emacs, I think
>>>> it's important to describe how this one differs (what improvements, features,
>>>> refinements, etc. does it provide that would make it worth considering
>>>> it instead of the default Emacs-provided option?).
>>>
>>> There are also many other packages (org, modus-themes, etc.) shipped with
>>> Emacs that we package in its most recent versions (and many others that
>>> pull these as propagated inputs, for some reason, even when already
>>> available with Emacs). Do we also describe how they differ ?
>>>
>>> Anyway, the release notes, update history, bug fixes and enhancements of
>>> every single version of vhdl-mode are given in the project home page,
>>> already included along with the package. Where do we need to replicate
>>> this information exactly for the patch to be accepted ?
>>
>> Oh, I hadn't noticed that this was the very same package that comes with
>> Emacs.  I guess it's fine then, but to avoid any misunderstanding,
>> perhaps the description text could mention it explicitly ("This is the
>> same @code{vhdl-mode} that comes with Emacs, albeit it may be newer") or
>> similar wording.
>
> Done.
>
> As an aside note, at some point, it should be decided how do we handle newest
> releases of packages already included with emacs: do we need to mention
> it explicitly or something else ?

I think explicit doesn't hurt.

-- 
Thanks,
Maxim

Previous Next

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