Quoting Lu?s Oliveira ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > That sucks. We need namespaces for packages. I'd argue that CLX could > more easily use GLX as the package name. Any luck on that side?
If I understood Christophe Rhodes right, he would be prepared to accept a patch renaming CLX's GL package. (Not sure about GLX, since there are already two distinct packages in CLX called GL and GLX.) d. _______________________________________________ cl-opengl-devel mailing list cl-opengl-devel@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cl-opengl-devel
