Hello!

On Mon 24 Oct 2005 16:02 +0200, Faré wrote:
> Why not have:
> * cl-slime, that depends on cl-slime-el and cl-swank
> * cl-slime-el, that contains the emacs lisp code and doesn't depend
> on cl-swank

I'd prefer slime/slime-el here: slime is not a library (usually called
cl-...), but a real "program", but...

I see no point in creating a slime-el package as AFAIK SLIME works
only on Emacs.

OTOH, if SLIME supports multiple swanks (and *we* support multiple
swanks), the Depends could be "cl-swank | sch-swank" ;-)

Just my 0.02EUR...

Thx, bye,
Gismo / Luca

Attachment: pgpkbgJJ6l8a7.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to