llvm dev - Dec 2017 - Upstreaming utils/kate/llvm.xml

Hello. I'm KDE developer and while poking around LLVM, I've stumbled
upon
LLVM IR syntax definition for Kate. Is there any reason why hasn't this
been upstreamed (
https://phabricator.kde.org/source/syntax-highlighting/repository/master/ )?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20171226/7fc6db49/attachment.html>

I would guess because LLVM IR highlighting would be of interest only to LLVM
developers, who would all have LLVM checked out anyway.  Also the textual syntax
isn't guaranteed stable long-term, and it would be an additional maintenance
burden on LLVM developers to make KDE patches.  I'm suspicious that even the
version in the LLVM tree is not current, as it hasn't been updated in
several years.
--paulr

From: llvm-dev [mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org] On Behalf Of Gleb
Popov via llvm-dev
Sent: Tuesday, December 26, 2017 10:57 AM
To: LLVM Dev
Subject: [llvm-dev] Upstreaming utils/kate/llvm.xml

Hello. I'm KDE developer and while poking around LLVM, I've stumbled
upon LLVM IR syntax definition for Kate. Is there any reason why hasn't this
been upstreamed (
https://phabricator.kde.org/source/syntax-highlighting/repository/master/ )?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20171228/e89120c0/attachment.html>

> On Dec 28, 2017, at 13:04, Robinson, Paul via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at
lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> 
> I would guess because LLVM IR highlighting would be of interest only to
LLVM developers, who would all have LLVM checked out anyway.  Also the textual
syntax isn't guaranteed stable long-term, and it would be an additional
maintenance burden on LLVM developers to make KDE patches.  I'm suspicious
that even the version in the LLVM tree is not current, as it hasn't been
updated in several years.
> --paulr
>   <>We already have emacs and vim syntax highlighting in tree which
people occasionally update. I don’t see why we wouldn’t include other editors
there. The text format doesn’t change so radically that the syntax highlighting
changes in any meaningful way.
-Matt
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20171228/22e5937e/attachment.html>

On Thu, Dec 28, 2017 at 9:04 PM, Robinson, Paul <paul.robinson at
sony.com>
wrote:
> I would guess because LLVM IR highlighting would be of interest only to
> LLVM developers, who would all have LLVM checked out anyway.  Also the
> textual syntax isn't guaranteed stable long-term, and it would be an
> additional maintenance burden on LLVM developers to make KDE patches. 
I'm
> suspicious that even the version in the LLVM tree is not current, as it
> hasn't been updated in several years.
>
> --paulr
>
>
>
> *From:* llvm-dev [mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org] *On Behalf Of
*Gleb
> Popov via llvm-dev
> *Sent:* Tuesday, December 26, 2017 10:57 AM
> *To:* LLVM Dev
> *Subject:* [llvm-dev] Upstreaming utils/kate/llvm.xml
>
>
>
> Hello. I'm KDE developer and while poking around LLVM, I've
stumbled upon
> LLVM IR syntax definition for Kate. Is there any reason why hasn't this
> been upstreamed ( https://phabricator.kde.org/source/syntax-highlighting/
> repository/master/ )?
>
Ok, is there any licensing issues that may prevent it be commited to Kate
repository? If not, I'd do that myself.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20171230/2ed78eff/attachment.html>