On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 02:38:04PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: > On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 12:55:02PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 02:29:35PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > > > I think we should better have a naming convention for camlp4 syntax > > > estension instead of picking randon names. What about restating our > > > current libraries naming convention into something like lib<foo>-camlp4? > > > > No other comments? Should I assume that this proposal is ok and write > > the corresponding policy paragraph? > > Sounds fine to me. > > BTW, is the policy accesible by the new project homepage ? > > Friendly, > > Sven Luther >
Hello, Well, i begin to write a paragraph on this in pkg-ocaml-maint/projects/dh-ocaml-make/trunk/policy... Go ahead if you want to add some paragraph ( the para about naming convention, already include the problem on camlp4 extension naming ). By the way, i am sorry not to have enough time to complete this xml policy... I will try to give it more time from now ( i think we begin to need to have a new policy... ). Feel free to complete the xml policy, i don't want this to be the work of only one ( not for work but for completeness of the work ). Regard Sylvain LE GALL ps : yeah, yeah i know, why do i have moved policy to dh-make-ocaml... Just revert it to pkg-ocaml-maint/projects/policy/trunk if you want, i have nothing against this... pps : if you have time and access, you can do a make X ( don't remember the right target ) to produce a html doc and put it on the new project interface.
