Stefano Zacchiroli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sat, Aug 20, 2005 at 11:16:47AM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote: >> > I vote for ocaml-mode (even if I believe that's a bit a namespace abuse >> Let's go for ocaml-mode > > Ok, just be sure to specify in package description that the shipped > emacs mode is ok also for caml, and maybe even the "caml-mode" name of > the emacs mode so that apt-cache search will work as expected.
I mentioned Caml Light. And 'caml-mode' is a 'ocaml-mode' substring so there shouldn't be any problem :-) >> > Why it depends on ocaml-nox? >> Because it needs development binaries like ocamlc. > > Ok, would recommend as suggested by Ralf be enough? I guess that some > features of the emacs mode like, e.g. indentation, would not need ocamlc > to be useful. I used Recommend. >> > 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. > > You're right, indeed it would not be a problem, go for it. Done :-) -- Jérôme Marant
