An unrelated project that has dealt with the problem at issue is Debian. https://wiki.debian.org/DebianAlternatives https://wiki.debian.org/DebianAlternatives

An unrelated project that has dealt with the problem at issue is Debian. https://wiki.debian.org/DebianAlternatives https://wiki.debian.org/DebianAlternatives I understand the purpose of `major-mode-remap-alist' to be setting up a similar alternatives mechanism. If you have defaults, you have to have a winner. The legitimate complaint is that there is a lot of code that expects `c-mode' to bring up cc-mode and builds on that, that might get loaded as a hook on `c-mode', and this will break if that function changes. It is also legitimate to expect a little discussion when something that might make your code appear obsolete is merged. When cc-mode was the default, c-ts-mode was the alternative, and you probably want a little bit of ceremony when making the switch. The annoying part is viewing ownership of the `c-mode' function as somewhat absolute because you got there first. But when you have file variables that say, "mode: c", for c-like code, but you use c-ts-mode for editing c-like stuff, you really want it to load c-ts-mode and not cc-mode. Also annoying is passive-aggressively putting in a change that messes up the mechanism "to spur discussion". That doesn't seem very collegial. I'm just remarking on my understanding of the discussion. I'm not an Emacs maintainer by any means, just a user.