[csw-maintainers] cswclassutils

[Peter FELECAN]

Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> writes:

>> As stated in my previous message I'm not opposed to it but wished to
>> know the rational. As I'm not satisfied with that I'll continue to
>> supply the .elc in my packages and separately the .el
>
> Ok.  I'm interested in standardizing something for this though.  It
> would be better for the users if all of our emacs packaged bits
> presented a similar experience.
>
> Shall we agree then that any package providing emacs add-on
> modules/functionality should provide .elc files in the primary package
> and offer an _el version of the package to deliver the .el source
> files?  That's what you've said, but should this become the formal
> policy?

I think so.

> A side thought: Does it make sense to have this policy be different
> than the python policy?  In theory, python add-ons could ship only the
> .pyc/.pyo files and provide _py packages for the .py source...I'm
> wondering this aloud for my own curiosity more than anything.

I'm leaning toward supplying separate _py packages but not having a
vested interest I remain neutral.
-- 
Peter