10:34 p.m.
I'd like to see three new packages (all contain multiple files, so I
don't think they belong in (prog|text)-modes):
haskell-mode, <http://www.haskell.org/haskell-mode/>
sml-mode, <ftp://rum.cs.yale.edu/pub/monnier/sml-mode>
These have been asked for before, both on xemacs-beta and privately.
xslide, <http://www.menteith.com/xslide/>
(X)Emacs Major Mode for XSL Stylesheets
I'd like to hear comments about these before starting; eg.
Should these be packaged separately or bundled into an existing package?
Experience/known pitfalls with these modes in XEmacs? I've used xslide
myself and found it to work well and to be useful.
--
Ville Skyttä
ville.skytta(a)xemacs.org
11:03 p.m.
>>>> "Ville" == Ville Skytt <Ville>
writes:
Ville> haskell-mode, <http://www.haskell.org/haskell-mode/>
Ville> sml-mode, <ftp://rum.cs.yale.edu/pub/monnier/sml-mode>
Ville> existing package? Experience/known pitfalls with these
Ville> modes in XEmacs? I've used xslide myself and found it to
Ville> work well and to be useful.
Yes, haskell-mode rebinds delete. But it's nothing serious one could
not change, of course. It does it - I think - because it wants to
indent when deleting. Unfortunately doesn't repect the XEmacs-setting
of `delete-key-deletes-forward'.
Bye, Adam.
--
Adam Duck (duck(a)cs.uni-frankfurt.de)
Bockenheimer Landstr. 135 / Zi. 211
60325 Frankfurt/Main
______________________________________
If you can spend a perfectly useless afternoon in a perfectly useless
manner, you have learned how to live.
- Lin Yutang
11:44 p.m.
Ville Skyttä writes:
I'd like to see three new packages (all contain multiple files,
so I
don't think they belong in (prog|text)-modes):
I disagree about the packaging - while I would like to see support for
haskell, I think this should be added to the prog-modes package.
Creating more packages just adds confusion, IMO. Prog-modes becomes
"support for various programming languages, except for <X> and <Y> and
<Z> which have their own packages" - just more loose ends for users to
keep track of. Furthermore, if a language is not supported in
prog-modes it would be reasonable to assume that XEmacs does not have
a mode to support that language. (Why do we have a prog-modes package
at all? Why not just have a separate package for every language
mode?)
It's already true that some language modes have their own packages -
e.g. ada and scheme - but I think that this is less than ideal.
fortran has several files associated with it, but that doesn't
mean it gets its own package.
1:10 a.m.
Executive summary: I think packages should be split along lines that
are convenient for the maintainers of the packages, and pui should do
a better job of indexing and grouping them. Very much IMO YMMV.
>>>> "Charles" == Charles G Waldman
<Charles> writes:
Charles> Creating more packages just adds confusion, IMO.
More than that. It allows us to more easily assign maintainers to
specific packages, since the work looks smaller. There have been
cases where people changed a Makefile and broke an entire collection.
Smaller, more cohesive packages make for better distribution of
responsibility and reliability.
Charles> Prog-modes becomes "support for various programming
Charles> languages, except for <X> and <Y> and <Z> which have
Charles> their own packages" - just more loose ends for users to
Charles> keep track of.
This is a design bug in pui, IMO, not a problem of the packaging
system itself. Note that in the list-packages display, you do not get
a complete list of what's supported in prog-modes. Also, many things
that are very like programming modes (PSGML) or are programming modes
(JDE) are just too big to put in prog-modes, and have prickly
maintainers. So putting everything into prog-modes is a non-starter.
Charles> (Why do we have a prog-modes package at all? Why not
Charles> just have a separate package for every language mode?)
The latter was Steve Baur's intention. However, at that time there
were very few "external maintainers". Since he was maintaining it all
himself, he grouped related modes, especially those which had no
active upstream maintainer, into bunches.
--
Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences http://turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp
University of Tsukuba Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
Don't ask how you can "do" free software business;
ask what your business can "do for" free software.
1:16 a.m.
Stephen J. Turnbull writes:
So putting everything into prog-modes is a non-starter.
Charles> (Why do we have a prog-modes package at all? Why not
Charles> just have a separate package for every language mode?)
The latter was Steve Baur's intention. However, at that time there
were very few "external maintainers". Since he was maintaining it all
himself, he grouped related modes, especially those which had no
active upstream maintainer, into bunches.
OK, this makes sense to me. It would at least be consistent if every
language mode was its own package. The situation where prog-modes
means "support for most, but not all programming languages" is
sub-optimal, IMO.
Of course there are bigger fish to fry...
9:30 p.m.
|--==> "CGW" == Charles G Waldman <Charles> writes:
CGW> I disagree about the packaging - while I would like to see support for
CGW> haskell, I think this should be added to the prog-modes package.
But it doesn't fit in with the way the package system was designed.
There are 2 different types of packages: 'single-file' and 'regular'.
The 'single-file' packages are supposed to be collections of related
but independent libraries. In theory, a user should be able to delete
a file from a 'single-file' package without shooting himself in the
foot.
The 'regular' packages are those where the files have some sort of
dependency on other files in the package. If a user was to delete one
of them, chances are that they will run into trouble.
I know that there are cases in the packages where this convention has
not been adhered to, but maybe that was through lack of
knowledge/diligence rather than by design.
The prog-modes package is a 'single-file' package.
CGW> Creating more packages just adds confusion, IMO. Prog-modes becomes
CGW> "support for various programming languages, except for <X> and
<Y> and
CGW> <Z> which have their own packages"
In reality, prog-modes is a collection of various lisp files that all
have a similar theme (in this case, programming languages) but those
files are not dependent upon one another.
CGW> Furthermore, if a language is not supported in prog-modes it
CGW> would be reasonable to assume that XEmacs does not have a mode
CGW> to support that language.
You wouldn't have to go too far down the list of packages before you
realised that this just wasn't the case (ada, c-support, cc-mode).
--
|---<Steve Youngs>---------------<GnuPG KeyID: 10D5C9C5>---|
| XEmacs - It's not just an editor. |
| It's a way of life. |
|------------------------------------<youngs(a)xemacs.org>---|
10:27 a.m.
Hi
The issue of *new* packages reminds me: I suggested to include
x-symbol (which already is distributed in package form) in the main
distribution.
What is the state of art?
Uwe Brauer
9:37 a.m.
>>>> "Uwe" == Uwe Brauer
<oub(a)ucmail.ucm.es> writes:
Uwe> The issue of *new* packages reminds me: I suggested to
Uwe> include x-symbol (which already is distributed in package
Uwe> form) in the main distribution.
Uwe> What is the state of art?
Moving stuff in the other direction. :-)
The core should contain only what is needed to bootstrap an XEmacs
installation.
--
Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences http://turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp
University of Tsukuba Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
Don't ask how you can "do" free software business;
ask what your business can "do for" free software.
11:13 a.m.
|--==> "UB" == Uwe Brauer <oub(a)ucmail.ucm.es> writes:
UB> Hi
UB> The issue of *new* packages reminds me: I suggested to include
UB> x-symbol (which already is distributed in package form) in the main
UB> distribution.
UB> What is the state of art?
It's on my todo list. Just haven't got to it yet.
--
|---<Steve Youngs>---------------<GnuPG KeyID: 10D5C9C5>---|
| XEmacs - It's not just an editor. |
| It's a way of life. |
|------------------------------------<youngs(a)xemacs.org>---|
1:44 p.m.
Steve Youngs writes:
|--==> "UB" == Uwe Brauer <oub(a)ucmail.ucm.es>
writes:
UB> Hi
UB> The issue of *new* packages reminds me: I suggested to include
UB> x-symbol (which already is distributed in package form) in the main
UB> distribution.
UB> What is the state of art?
It's on my todo list. Just haven't got to it yet.
Ok, I thought given the fact, that xsymbol is already in package form
it would be a snap to include. I see that it is not so. If I can be of
any help let me know.
8:08 a.m.
>>>> "Ville" == Ville Skytt <Ville>
writes:
Ville> I'd like to see three new packages (all contain multiple files, so I
Ville> don't think they belong in (prog|text)-modes):
Ville> haskell-mode, <http://www.haskell.org/haskell-mode/>
Ville> sml-mode, <ftp://rum.cs.yale.edu/pub/monnier/sml-mode>
Ville> These have been asked for before, both on xemacs-beta and privately.
I'm all for sml-mode (and while we're at it, we might want to do
O'Caml as well). I'm less sure about Haskell mode, as there are 3 or
4 popular Haskell modes out there, and this particular one is often a
royal pain. If we do include it, I think I have the minor patches
required to make it work.
--
Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla
4:27 p.m.
On Thu, 2002-03-07 at 10:08, Michael Sperber [Mr. Preprocessor] wrote:
Ville> haskell-mode, <http://www.haskell.org/haskell-mode/>
Ville> sml-mode, <ftp://rum.cs.yale.edu/pub/monnier/sml-mode>
Ville> These have been asked for before, both on xemacs-beta and privately.
I'm all for sml-mode (and while we're at it, we might want to do
O'Caml as well). I'm less sure about Haskell mode, as there are 3 or
4 popular Haskell modes out there, and this particular one is often a
royal pain. If we do include it, I think I have the minor patches
required to make it work.
Ok. I tried out packaging sml-mode but found that it doesn't work (with
XEmacs) out of the box, looks like it is at least missing some
autoloads;
File mode specification error: (void-variable sml-font-lock-defaults)
I'll take a closer look at it.
I had better luck with xslide and haskell-mode (the one mentioned above)
but as I am not familiar with Haskell at all, I can't verify much of the
functionality. Basically what I can do with the mode is to load a file
and see that indentation and font-locking /seem/ to work (which do so).
xslide works fine.
I'd be happy to include your haskell-mode patches in the upcoming new
package or try to package some other of the haskell-modes out there,
pointers welcome.
BTW; how does one submit a new package? Just a big patch to
xemacs-patches, I guess...
--
Ville Skyttä
ville.skytta(a)xemacs.org
10:04 p.m.
|--==> "VS" == Ville Skytt <Ville> writes:
VS> BTW; how does one submit a new package? Just a big patch to
VS> xemacs-patches, I guess...
If you're willing to maintain the new package:
Tell me the name of the package and I'll add the directory to
CVS (put a .cvsignore in so cvs up gets it for you), give you
access to that directory and you can add it yourself.
If you don't want to maintain the new package:
Send me a tarball of the new package and I'll fix it up for
you.
--
|---<Steve Youngs>---------------<GnuPG KeyID: 10D5C9C5>---|
| XEmacs - It's not just an editor. |
| It's a way of life. |
|------------------------------------<youngs(a)xemacs.org>---|
10:06 p.m.
On Thu, 2002-03-14 at 00:04, Steve Youngs wrote:
If you're willing to maintain the new package:
Tell me the name of the package and I'll add the directory to
CVS (put a .cvsignore in so cvs up gets it for you), give you
access to that directory and you can add it yourself.
Ok, please do set up a dir for the package "xslide". I'll maintain it,
the author seems to be pretty busy nowadays. Also, I suppose you'll
need to add these:
Index: package-compile.el
===================================================================
RCS file: /pack/xemacscvs/XEmacs/packages/package-compile.el,v
retrieving revision 1.39
diff -a -u -r1.39 package-compile.el
--- package-compile.el 2002/02/23 23:55:27 1.39
+++ package-compile.el 2002/03/14 22:03:57
＠＠ -149,6 +149,7 ＠＠
("w3" . "xemacs-packages")
("xemacs-base" . "xemacs-packages")
("xemacs-devel" . "xemacs-packages")
+ ("xslide" . "xemacs-packages")
("xslt-process" . "xemacs-packages")
("zenirc" . "xemacs-packages")
;; mule/*
Index: xemacs-packages/Makefile
===================================================================
RCS file: /pack/xemacscvs/XEmacs/packages/xemacs-packages/Makefile,v
retrieving revision 1.10
diff -a -u -r1.10 Makefile
--- xemacs-packages/Makefile 2002/02/23 23:55:29 1.10
+++ xemacs-packages/Makefile 2002/03/14 22:03:57
＠＠ -30,6 +30,6 ＠＠
xslt-process eterm igrep ilisp os-utils ps-print view-process \
eshell pcomplete edit-utils speedbar calc calendar forms frame-icon \
hm--html-menus ispell pc psgml sgml slider text-modes time \
- strokes tramp clearcase dictionary sieve ibuffer mmm-mode
+ strokes tramp clearcase dictionary sieve ibuffer mmm-mode xslide
include ../iterate.rules
--
Ville Skyttä
ville.skytta(a)xemacs.org
9:48 a.m.
|--==> "VS" == Ville Skytt <Ville> writes:
VS> Ok, please do set up a dir for the package "xslide". I'll maintain
it,
Great. Done.
VS> Also, I suppose you'll need to add these:
Yep, thanks.
--
|---<Steve Youngs>---------------<GnuPG KeyID: 10D5C9C5>---|
| XEmacs - It's not just an editor. |
| It's a way of life. |
|------------------------------------<youngs(a)xemacs.org>---|
8:58 p.m.
|--==> "VS" == Ville Skytt <Ville> writes:
VS> I'd like to see three new packages (all contain multiple files, so I
VS> don't think they belong in (prog|text)-modes):
[...]
VS> I'd like to hear comments about these before starting; eg.
VS> Should these be packaged separately or bundled into an existing package?
They should go into their own separate packages.
--
|---<Steve Youngs>---------------<GnuPG KeyID: 10D5C9C5>---|
| XEmacs - It's not just an editor. |
| It's a way of life. |
|------------------------------------<youngs(a)xemacs.org>---|
8333
days inactive
8342
days old
15 comments
7 participants
participants (7)
-
Adam Duck -
Charles Waldman -
Michael Sperber -
Stephen J. Turnbull -
Steve Youngs -
Uwe Brauer -
Ville Skyttä