TEC writes:
> A little progress update.
>
> https://github.com/tecosaur/org-lsp now exists.
I encourage everyone to work with Timothy on how to make real progress
on org-lsp. If needed so, please use https://github.com/tecosaur/org-lsp
for reporting issues and suggestions.
Timothy, I'm
[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]
> Daniel Ravicher found 283 software patents that, if upheld as valid by the
On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 7:35 PM Gerry Agbobada
wrote:
> Furthermore, I find that spending so much time and energy to prevent
> people from spending their time on what they think is right, is pretty
> harmful.
>
This is really key.
Timothy, please keep up the good work and pay no attention to
> Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2020 at 7:25 AM
> From: "Jean Louis"
> To: "Christopher Dimech"
> Cc: neiljer...@gmail.com, emacs-orgmode@gnu.org, "Richard Stallman"
> , tecos...@gmail.com
> Subject: Re: LSP is Microsoft's patented protocol - Re: Em
I can understand that GNU and Org shall ignore patents and continue without
putting attention.
Jean
;Richard Stallman"
> Cc: neiljer...@gmail.com, emacs-orgmode@gnu.org, tecos...@gmail.com
> Subject: Re: LSP is Microsoft's patented protocol - Re: Emacs as an Org LSP
> server
>
> * Richard Stallman [2020-12-15 08:48]:
> > [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email
* Richard Stallman [2020-12-15 08:48]:
> [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider]]]
> [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]]
> [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]
>
> > Do you have evidence it is not
[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]
> Do you have evidence it is not patented?
That sort of question is not useful to
* Dominik Schrempf [2020-12-15 01:36]:
> I think this is an excellent idea. However, I am not familiar with the legal
> aspects mentioned by Jean.
I hope there will be no legal problems and that my statements will be
proven as wrong.
> So far I had good experiences with language servers. On
Hello!
I am infrequent active participant on this list but follow some discussions.
This one I found particularly interesting. I do see both of your points Tim
Cross, and Jean Louis, thank you for your detailed explanations including the
references.
As a user of Emacs and Org mode (and not so
There is definitely nothing wrong in providing Org language server
that runs for different editors who could support the LSP protocol, it
will boost collaboration.
That is pretty much separate subject of the centralization and
strategies we spoke about.
* Tim Cross [2020-12-14 23:19]:
> This is
See also. https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2017-04/msg00798.html
and
https://www.reddit.com/r/emacs/comments/696pv1/rms_supports_language_server_protocol_integration/
for some discussion. Best,
Tom
On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 4:31 PM Tim Cross wrote:
>
>
>
> I am no fan of Microsoft.
Russell Adams writes:
> So in summary, why should anyone contribute to exporting our unique
> features to other editors instead of investing that time making Emacs
> better?
>
You cannot know that such an effort won't also benefit Emacs org mode
users. The greater the user base, the greater
I am no fan of Microsoft. I have run Linux as my primary desktop since
1994. I have been working as a developer since 1988 and have first hand
experience regarding many of the poor business practices of Microsoft.
However, I think the LSP is actually a positive imitative and a
potential benefit
* Russell Adams [2020-12-14 22:20]:
:PROPERTIES:
:CREATED: [2020-12-14 Mon 23:18]
:ID: a24a5299-11e6-4ecf-a6c5-4622f0d6c28b
:END:
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 02:12:43AM +0800, TEC wrote:
> > > [ MS Taint ]
> >
> > I'm a stats student, so if you'll excuse the slightly odd perspective,
Jean Louis writes:
> It may all look nice and shiny. But what you people don't understand
> is that it is Microsoft and deep meaning of Microsoft one can know if
> one researches the history as only so one can see the present and look
> into future. Microsoft never changed its strategies.
On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 02:26:30AM +0800, TEC wrote:
> This simply isn't what's happening here. I'm just starting work on my
> own little project to give non-emacs people a taste of Org's
> capabilities. I didn't think the way I spend my time was such a matter
> of public concern to the Emacs
On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 02:12:43AM +0800, TEC wrote:
> > [ MS Taint ]
>
> I'm a stats student, so if you'll excuse the slightly odd perspective, I
> see the chance of MS being dodgy as a bayesian process. Previous
> knowledge creates an informed prior. It does not allow you to make
> conclusions
* TEC [2020-12-14 21:48]:
>
> Hi Jean,
>
> Please read my previous emails before re-iterating the same points.
>
> LSP is not patented, it's just referenced in a patent about MS's fancy
> remote development extension.
Do you have evidence it is not patented?
A patent need not be implemented
Hi Jean,
Please read my previous emails before re-iterating the same points.
LSP is not patented, it's just referenced in a patent about MS's fancy
remote development extension.
Jean Louis writes:
> Enrich it with unencumbered patent-free solutions.
That's what I'm doing :)
--
Timothy.
Hi Jean,
you quoted the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines already in this
list: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/kind-communication.en.html
May I draw your attention to this specific sentence:
Rather than trying to have the last word, look for the times when
there is no need to reply, perhaps
* TEC [2020-12-14 21:35]:
>
> Jean Louis writes:
>
> > Microsoft have filed patent for LSP languag server protocol:
> > https://uspto.report/patent/app/20190149346
>
> This isn't a patent for LSP (it's an open standard), this is a patent
> for their Remote Development package:
>
* TEC [2020-12-14 20:24]:
>
> Jean Louis writes:
>
> > [LSP is a evil plot from microsoft]
>
> Hi Jean,
>
> I can see that you're overly concerned about Microsoft being able to
> somehow exert control over this. It may assuage your concerns to see an
> example "technology stack" that Org-LSP
Jean Louis writes:
> Microsoft have filed patent for LSP languag server protocol:
> https://uspto.report/patent/app/20190149346
This isn't a patent for LSP (it's an open standard), this is a patent
for their Remote Development package:
* Gerry Agbobada [2020-12-14 20:32]:
>
> > It may all look nice and shiny. But what you people don't understand
> > is that it is Microsoft and deep meaning of Microsoft one can know if
> > one researches the history as only so one can see the present and look
> > into future. Microsoft never
Russell Adams writes:
> REST API calls to a remote server as a core part of editing text in
> your editor isn't concerning? How remote? How would you know? If they
> use HTTPS could you even see what is sent?
I'm not concerned about REST API calls to a remote server, because:
1. There are no
Hi Neil,
Nope! That’s the nice thing, those are all currently features of the LSP
protocol .
All the best,Timothy
From: ">Neil Jerram
Subject: Re: Emacs as an Org LSP server
To: ">TEC
Cc: "org-mode-email"
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2020 01:57:27 +0800
Yes, thanks,
On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 01:08:47AM +0800, TEC wrote:
>
> Jean Louis writes:
>
> > [LSP is a evil plot from microsoft]
>
> I can see that you're overly concerned about Microsoft being able to
> somehow exert control over this. It may assuage your concerns to see an
> example "technology stack"
Russell Adams writes:
> LSP is also REST based, so your editor how has to talk to a web
> *server* over a network. This could be central, and not just on your
> machine. How would you know in an update that didn't happen?
This just ... isn't right.
It's not even REST based, it's using
the nice stuff like table alignment, checkbox state propagation…
>
> Does that help?
>
> All the best,
> *Timothy*
>
> * From*: Neil Jerram <%22neil+jerram%22+%3cneiljer...@gmail.com%3E>
> * Subject*: Re: Emacs as an Org LSP server
> * To*: TEC <%22tec%22+%3ctecos
stuff like table alignment, checkbox state propagation…
Does that help?
All the best,Timothy
From: ">Neil Jerram
Subject: Re: Emacs as an Org LSP server
To: ">TEC
Cc: "org-mode-email"
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2020 01:22:55 +0800
I'm afraid things still aren't clear for m
On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 05:22:55PM +, Neil Jerram wrote:
> If I try to analogise from how LSP works for golang, I believe the LSP
> server does things like
> - complete symbol beginning with "Xyz"
> - tell me where so-and-so function is defined (e.g. so that the client
> editor can jump to
Jean Louis writes:
> [LSP is a evil plot from microsoft]
Hi Jean,
I can see that you're overly concerned about Microsoft being able to
somehow exert control over this. It may assuage your concerns to see an
example "technology stack" that Org-LSP could fit into.
1. Org / Emacs, all GPL-3
2.
who don’t use Emacs, by hooking into Emacs
> itself.
>
> Does that clear things up for you? You can also see
> https://langserver.org/.
>
> All the best,
> *Timothy*
>
> * From*: Neil Jerram <%22neil+jerram%22+%3cneiljer...@gmail.com%3E>
> * Subject*: Re: Emacs as
It may all look nice and shiny. But what you people don't understand
is that it is Microsoft and deep meaning of Microsoft one can know if
one researches the history as only so one can see the present and look
into future. Microsoft never changed its strategies. Language server
protocol is just
that clear things up for you? You can also see https://langserver.org/.
All the best,Timothy
From: ">Neil Jerram
Subject: Re: Emacs as an Org LSP server
To: ">TEC
Cc: "org-mode-email"
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 23:46:12 +0800
Thanks Timothy. I did read the README, bu
provides language features like
> auto complete, go to definition, find all references etc.
>
> That should give you an idea of the intent here.
>
> All the best,
> *Timothy*
>
> * From*: Neil Jerram <%22neil+jerram%22+%3cneiljer...@gmail.com%3E>
> * Subject*: Re: Ema
e: Emacs as an Org LSP server
To: ">TEC
Cc: "org-mode-email"
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 19:41:05 +0800
Could you describe a use case? Apologies if I missed this in earlier threads.On Sun, 13 Dec 2020 at 10:44, TEC <tecos...@gmail.com> wrote:
A little progress update.https://github.co
Could you describe a use case? Apologies if I missed this in earlier
threads.
On Sun, 13 Dec 2020 at 10:44, TEC wrote:
>
> A little progress update.
>
> https://github.com/tecosaur/org-lsp now exists.
>
> I have no idea what I'm doing, so if anyone has feedback on the current
> idea, that
Gerry Agbobada writes:
> On Sun, Dec 13, 2020, at 21:23, Jean Louis wrote:
>> * TEC [2020-12-13 20:35]:
>> > > From a perspective that some server has to know what user is writing
>> > > it is advisable to use one own's servers. But if idea gets popular
>> > > some company will commercialize
I think maybe you might be thrown off by the word "server"? Lsp is just a
standardization of how an editor can do language-specific things. The fact
that standardization exists makes the whole thing pluggable by various
services. These typically run in a separate process - which is a good idea
On Sun, Dec 13, 2020, at 21:23, Jean Louis wrote:
> * TEC [2020-12-13 20:35]:
> > > From a perspective that some server has to know what user is writing
> > > it is advisable to use one own's servers. But if idea gets popular
> > > some company will commercialize it and centralize user's data and
* TEC [2020-12-13 20:35]:
> > From a perspective that some server has to know what user is writing
> > it is advisable to use one own's servers. But if idea gets popular
> > some company will commercialize it and centralize user's data and
> > privacy is gone.
>
> FYI the nature of LSP (as I
Jean Louis writes:
> * TEC [2020-12-13 13:44]:
>>
>> A little progress update.
>>
>> https://github.com/tecosaur/org-lsp now exists.
>
> As Org-mode does not have collaboration neither was initially designed
> for other editor, such idea is welcome.
>
> From a perspective that some server
* TEC [2020-12-13 13:44]:
>
> A little progress update.
>
> https://github.com/tecosaur/org-lsp now exists.
As Org-mode does not have collaboration neither was initially designed
for other editor, such idea is welcome.
>From a perspective that some server has to know what user is writing
it
Excellent idea!
I frequently use Eclipse and, although I do always have an Emacs open, the
idea of seamlessly using org-mode inside Eclipse is very attractive...
-- Bill
On Sun, Dec 13, 2020 at 12:44 PM TEC wrote:
>
> A little progress update.
>
> https://github.com/tecosaur/org-lsp now
A little progress update.
https://github.com/tecosaur/org-lsp now exists.
I have no idea what I'm doing, so if anyone has feedback on the current
idea, that would be much appreciated.
TEC writes:
> Hi Everyone,
>
> From the Org standardisation effort the idea of using Emacs as the basis
>
Hi Everyone,
From the Org standardisation effort the idea of using Emacs as the
basis
of an LSP server for Org has been mentioned a few times.
I thought this deserved it's own thread so here it is :)
I'm quite keen to investigate the viability of this idea.
Some key questions that I think
48 matches
Mail list logo
