On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 12:56:05PM +0200, Ralf Treinen wrote: > On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 12:35:55PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 12:17:45PM +0200, Ralf Treinen wrote: > > > On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 12:00:43PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > > > > On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 11:14:56AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 11:11:45AM +0200, Ralf Treinen wrote: > > > > > > I wonder if anyone is using the original emacs caml mode. Everyone I > > > > > > know uses tuareg mode. Why not just drop the emacs mode from the > > > > > > ocaml-* packages? > > > > > > > > > > I think it's too much a drastic choice to be made by we debian > > > > > packages. > > > > > After all the original emacs mode is shipped by upstream and users may > > > > > expect it to be available in the debian package. > > > > > > > > > > A separate package, which is not installed per default when you > > > > > install > > > > > ocaml (that mean to me no Recommends on it) is a better choice IMO. > > > > > > > > Agreed. > > > > > > > > I also feel that upstream may be using it :) > > > > > > I don't think that the upstream developers run ocaml from the debian > > > > No, but they may like to have it in case they come accross a default debian > > install. > > > > > packages. Anyway, if someone wants to take care of an ocaml-emacsmode > > > package I won't object. > > > > not a separate package, just a separate binary packages. > > Yes, that is what I meant. Maybe this would also be an occassion to > have an /etc/alternative mechanism to choose a system-wide default > emacs mode for editing .ml files, as we already discussed it in the > past. Alternatives would be the original and the tuareg mode. On the > other hand I am not sure whether users of other ML dialects (sml) > would be happy with that since, AFAIK, neither the original ocaml > mode nor tuareg are intended for use with other ML dialects, and since > others MLs might use the .ml filenaem suffix as well. What do you > think?
They probably can provide their own alternatives then ? Or they can have a dummy donothing alternative ? Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
