Re: CEDET Merge

[David Engster]

Edward John Steere writes:
> I don't understand what's preventing us from porting this and other
> aspects of CEDET right away -- other than scope creep perhaps?  I would
> advise against using upstream as a fallback though because:
>  a) it's likely to receive even less attention after the merge;
>  b) most of it doesn't work with the latest Emacs because of the changes
>     to EIEIO in core;

I'm happy to hear that Java support works for people. Last time I tried
it didn't even parse generics, but I don't code much in Java anymore so
I haven't tried recently.

My worry is indeed feature creep. The CEDET merge fell behind because I
couldn't keep up with the changes in Emacs, most notably the switch to
git and the extensive changes in EIEIO. The code base is very large and
complicated, so I'm against adding more code to Emacs core. Instead, we
should try to make it more modular and put support for certain languages
and project types into separate ELPA projects. This would also make it
easier to share maintainership of CEDET.

-David