Ihor Radchenko <[email protected]> writes:
Christian Moe <[email protected]> writes:
Looking at GNU ELPA, it seems they only list two ob-*.el
packages,
ob-haxe.el and ob-asymptote.el.
Both are documented in Worg, but the Babel languages index page
does not
link to the Haxe documentation, whereas ob-asymptote.el is
wrongly
listed as a part of org-contrib.
To my mind, this suggests that we /should/ add a section
listing the two
GNU ELPA packages and link properly to the documentation from
there, and
we can add any further additions (especially if they write up a
docs
page for Worg).
+1 for listing packages that have documentation on WORG.
Although we may need to check if that documentation is
up-to-date,
especially for packages that used to be in org-contrib. Maybe
contact
the maintainers to double-check.
+1. I can add a table for the two GNU Elpa languages, and correct
the org-contrib table. Also, I'll contact maintainers if I have
questions.
Meanwhile, there are some 80 ob-*.el packages on Melpa, from
the fairly
obscure to Rust and PHP. Should we list them as well? It
wouldn't be a
problem, but it would need to be updated every now and then,
and it
wouldn't add value to what people can already do with
list-packages if
they've added Melpa. Perhaps we should list only those that put
up a
docs page on Worg (none at present?).
There gotta be a way to do it programmatically I think. We
should be able
to fetch all the packages from ELPA/MELPA and search for names
matching ob-*.
I'm against listing the Melpa packages.
There is the maintenance issue and the effort to program a
solution, and my gut feeling is that no one is likely to write
documentation so their package can be advertised on Worg. My
$0.02.
All the best,
Tom
--
Thomas S. Dye
https://tsdye.online/tsdye
