[Enrico Zini] > Could you make a list of packages that would fit? It would also help > initializing the tag data so that we don't have tags matching no > packages.
A quick search show these packages mentioning cobol: pere@meta:~$ apt-cache search cobol exuberant-ctags - build tag file indexes of source code definitions gnucobol - COBOL compiler libcob4 - COBOL compiler - runtime library libcob4-dev - COBOL compiler - development files open-cobol - transitional dummy package for gnucobol sloccount - programs for counting physical source lines of code (SLOC) src2tex - converter from source program files to TeX format files universalindentgui - GUI frontend for several code beautifiers pere@meta:~$ As far as I can tell, only open-cobol should not have the cobol tag (well, it could get it, but it is just a placeholder for gnucobol). The rest can handle cobol code. > If we still don't have so many packages for those tags in the archive, > you can use devel::lang::TODO implemented-in::TODO for the time being, > or given how well defined are those tags and how cobol is a > historically well established language, we could make an exception. I > would still prefer not to introduce tags without associated packages, > though. I used TODO on gnucobol, but thought it was time to get a cobol tag in place and filed here too. :) -- Happy hacking Petter Reinholdtsen
