Stefano Zacchiroli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sat, Aug 20, 2005 at 10:02:03AM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote: >> 1/ it is called caml-mode in sources since it applies to caml light >> as well. Shall I keep calling it caml-mode or ocaml-mode? > > I vote for ocaml-mode (even if I believe that's a bit a namespace abuse > having *-mode names for emacs mode packages, *-emacs-mode would have > been better, but it seems to be a widely used convention).
Let's go for ocaml-mode >> 2/ this new package depends on ocaml-nox, and ocaml-nox needs to >> depend on it until etch is released (for transitional purpose), >> which makes a circular dependency. Is this a problem? > > Why it depends on ocaml-nox? Because it needs development binaries like ocamlc. > As Sven I'm against the transitional purpose argument. I would go for no > relationship at all (no Depends/Recommends/Suggests) from ocaml-nox to Why would Suggests be a problem? I'd like to suggest tuareg-mode | ocaml-mode. > ocaml-mode and an entry in NEWS.Debian stating that the emacs mode has > been moved to a separate package named ocaml-mode. > > Many thanks for your work Jerome, really. You're welcome. -- Jérôme Marant
