Re: Few questions
Stefano Zacchiroli <zack@debian.org> 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
Reply to: