[ocaml-infra] Tuareg → OCaml umbrella

[Philippe Wang]

OCaml offers multiple choices for doing things, and I hope that won’t change.
Choosing and advertising for a single editor or editor mode doesn’t sound good to me.
Therefore, I believe it wouldn’t harm the OCaml community to have some better place and visibility for Tuareg, which could well cohabit with some concurrent projects under the OCaml umbrella. Also I believe https://github.com/ocaml is (at least now) a lot better place than {http://tuareg.forge.ocamlcore.org + https://forge.ocamlcore.org/projects/tuareg/ which are quite confusing, especially the former which seems even more deprecated than the latter}, especially since a lot of OCaml projects are now under https://github.com/ocaml/.

And since the OCaml distribution is being cleaned-up (isn’t it?), perhaps it’s also time to remove the emacs/*.el files from it, and put them somewhere else (perhaps under https://github.com/ocaml/ as well, I don’t really care).

Yes I’ll be happier if Tuareg moves to https://github.com/ocaml/tuareg/.

On 05 Jan 2014, at 00:06, Gabriel Scherer <gabriel.scherer at gmail.com> wrote:

> I hope this does not sound too negative, but I'm not sure we would gain by "blessing" tuareg as "the" ocaml editor mode for Emacs. The parallel existence of caml-mode and tuareg-mode has been a long-time annoyance of mine, because I don't see a strong justification for using either instead of the other. In particular tuareg has had long-standing bugs that are rather annoying, and I for one would be very happy to throw away any kind of elisp-implemented approximation of the OCaml syntax, and use a more principled approach such as Merlin+ocp-index to handle them (none of which currently support syntax highlighting iirc., but that could be added to ocp-index capabilities).
> 
> I do think however that given the high number of Tuareg users, it is a very good thing that dedicated souls such as Christophe accept the pain of maintaining emacs modes. If he can be pleased by having tuareg repo under's the "ocaml" community umbrella, I see no strong reason why not -- only I won't recommend as strongly all of the software under the "ocaml" umbrella.
> 
> 
> On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 6:46 PM, Christophe Troestler <Christophe.Troestler at umons.ac.be> wrote:
> Hi Anil,
> 
> On Thu, 2 Jan 2014 14:50:12 +0000, Anil Madhavapeddy wrote:
> >
> > I have no objection.  In fact, there are a few other editor tools
> > that I'd like to move under the ocaml org in order to "bless" them.
> 
> Since I do not have admin rights on the organization "ocaml", I cannot
> transfer the repo.  Since there are no issues yet on my version, you
> can simply create a tuareg repo and I'll push the current history.
> Is it good for you?
> 
> Best,
> C.
> _______________________________________________
> Infrastructure mailing list
> Infrastructure at lists.ocaml.org
> http://lists.ocaml.org/listinfo/infrastructure
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Infrastructure mailing list
> Infrastructure at lists.ocaml.org
> http://lists.ocaml.org/listinfo/infrastructure

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ocaml.org/pipermail/infrastructure/attachments/20140105/3c6ff45c/attachment.html>