Re: ruby mode additional packages

[Dmitry Gutov]

Hi!

On 07.07.2022 16:50, Grant Shangreaux wrote:
> i've recently been re-rolling a configuration using only ELPA and
> non-gnu ELPA package archives. i primarily work with ruby in my
> day-to-day work, and was a bit surprised that many of the packages i've
> grown accustomed to are not available, particularly inf-ruby.

> i understand that much of it comes from copyright assignment issues, but
> i was curious if there is any work to bring some of the ruby support
> packages into non-gnu ELPA? i am sort of the de-facto maintainer of the
> minitest-emacs package, though i did not write it. i would be
> interested in organizing what it takes to get it into non-gnu ELPA.

There's nothing barring inf-ruby from being featured in NonGNU ELPA. Now 
that you have voiced the question, we can get it added.

> in addition to that, i started trying to make my own inferior ruby based
> off of comint-mode, and while its very basic right now, it does
> work. would there be any desire to add a FSF assigned new version of
> inferior ruby to ELPA or Emacs proper? what considerations are required
> for something like that? i do not want to detract from the work people
> put into the existing inf-ruby. i also do not want to cause any issues
> with copyright or licensing, for example, using inf-ruby as a basis
> to write a new package.

I don't know, I feel like most of the stuff in inf-ruby is fairly 
essential (if I do say so myself, having written or re-written a 
significant part of it).

If you want to reimplement the parts written by people without copyright 
assignment, be my guest, I guess. Maybe to get it in ELPA, or maybe into 
Emacs proper.

But according to my observations, people have asked for the reverse: to 
have the latest version of ruby-mode in some ELPA archive, to be able to 
use it from any Emacs release.

So from where I'm sitting, having inf-ruby in NonGNU ELPA would solve 
99% of everyone's needs.

> i do have my FSF paperwork in order, and i'd love to contribute what i
> can. since i'm in ruby land most often i thought i would ask here to see
> where the effort would best be placed. thank you!

I personally think the effort is best placed improving the existing 
packages.

Not to discourage you from writing ones from scratch, though. That can 
be fun and useful too.