On Mon, Sep 30, 2002 at 12:00:09PM +0200, Remi VANICAT wrote: > Jérôme Marant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Hello, > > > > I have almost finished the preparation of the Cameleon packages > > (Thanks Dimitri Ara for upstream fixes). > > > > However, I still have some wonderings: > > - as defined by upstream, all cameleon libraries are being > > installed in /usr/lib/ocaml/cameleon, so how do I manage > > META files? > > There is tree mean : > - move each library in a different repertory (well, I think it's > better to stay with upstream wish) > - create some empty directory containing only the META information > - use predicate
This solution is currently quite impossible. It means a big change of makefiles upstream. And Cameleon is shipped as a single application after all. A solution on the findlib since would be better (like multiple META files in single directory) > > > - Cameleon provides IoXML which is a Camlp4 syntax extension. > > We don't have any naming policy for syntax extensions. > > (Stefano proposed ocaml-ioxml because he thinks that ioxml > > is too generic) > > seam good. So ocaml-ioxml is fine? > > > - what naming policy should I use for ocaml program that have > > a quite generic name (for example "report"). Should I use > > a ocaml- prefix? How do we consider a program name is > > too generic? > > well : > http://packages.debian.org/cgi-bin/search_contents.pl?word=report&searchmode=searchfiles&case=insensitive&version=unstable&arch=i386&directories=yes > list 32 pages of package with a file whose name contain report. Seem > to be a good indication that this name is too generic. Sure. But as a consistency, should we rename ocaml applications ocaml-<app>? Thanks. -- Jérôme Marant
