Re: Tree-sitter maturity

[Stefan Kangas]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

>> Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2024 10:05:47 -0500
>> From: Daniel Colascione <dancol@dancol.org>
>> CC: emacs-devel@gnu.org, philipk@posteo.net, rms@gnu.org, manphiz@gmail.com
>>
>> >> Why not just vendor all the grammars with the Emacs modes that use them?
>> >
>> >We'd need to ask their developers to agree to this.
>>
>> Why? They're free software. For copyright assignment? Seems like an 
>> exception would make sense here.
>
> AFAIK, that was the policy until now: we should have written agreement
> by authors to include any code in Emacs.  RMS might know more, because
> he asked for that.

We can add non-assigned files to our tree if we consider them as _not_ a
part of Emacs.  In that case, there is no need to copyright assign them
to the FSF.

For example, as explained in admin/notes/copyright:

    lwlib/
    rms (2007/02/17): "lwlib is not assigned to the FSF; we don't
    consider it part of Emacs. [...] Therefore non-FSF copyrights are ok
    in lwlib."

In my view, vendored tree-sitter grammars would be analogous to that.