"Paolo Bonzini"<bonzini@gnu.org> wrote: > It's definitely a step towards that, though. Does your experience with > CVST suggest that it's better to do both steps at the same time? Fair enough, but I would hope that whatever solution is chosen, it is open towards eventually being able to support cross-dialect projects. > I would be worried that including in an "initial battle plan" an > editor-friendly syntax would lead to endless discussions and no code > produced. Yes, but I'm more worried about "real" vs "fake" integration, than I am about particulars of a syntax. With fake integration all you'll get with git is push, pull and commit, leaving all the rest of the capabilities behind. That will not make us a good team player.