On Sunday 27 May 2007, Jonathan Underwood wrote:
I would propose guidelines such as these:
1) Packages which include add on modes for (X)Emacs should package the
byte compiled lisp files for these modes in a sub-package named
foo-emacs and/or foo-xemacs.
I don't agree with that naming - it doesn't follow the "if it's bar for
call it foo-bar" naming strategy applied to just about everything else.
emacs-foo and xemacs-foo would be better. Ditto emacs-foo-el, xemacs-foo-el.
Otherwise, looks good to me.