On Tue, May 06, 2003 at 08:57:05PM +0200, Ralf Treinen wrote: > On Tue, May 06, 2003 at 02:26:18PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > > On Tue, May 06, 2003 at 01:44:42PM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote: > > > > BTW, I'd advice that you provide the emacs mode separately, in > > > a package called "ocaml-mode". > > > > Ok, i can do that, but i don't really like it a lot. It is part of the > > ocaml source package, and any trouble i would have with the emacs mode > > would mean a new upload to ocaml also. > > Splitting off a new binary package (with architecture=all) is > easy. The emacs files of the ocaml package currently take > 164 kB for the el (emacs-lisp sourec) files, plus 100 - 124 kB > per flavour. Hence, if you have three flavours of emacs installed
Err, the 100-124 per flavor are the ones that get compiled at install time, aren't they. > (like me) then this sums up to 0.5MB. Seems worth to split it off, > in particular since, as Jérôme said, tuareg-mode is much more > popular. In fact I know of noone who uses the original ocaml > emacs mode. Ok, altough i guess there is a reason for it being shipped with ocaml and not tuareg. > > Another solution would be to not ship the emacs mode from the ocaml > > package and create a new source package containing the emacs mode, or > > maybe even add it to the existing package which contains the alternative > > emacs mode, maintained by Ralf, if i am not wrong. > > I am completely against this. Maintaining binary packages with > multiple source (like ocaml-tools) is a PITA. What about maintaining it separatedly then ? in his own source package i split of from the ocaml source ? But again, maybe i will just split of a new binary package. At least it will no more stop ocaml from being installed if it breaks. I will still have to maintain it though. Friendly, Sven Luther
