Re: camlp4 syntax extensions' naming convention
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.
Reply to: