Re: Packaging mathjax and other javascript libraries

[Arun Isaac]

Ricardo Wurmus writes:

> Arun Isaac <address@hidden> writes:
>
>>> So far we have separated packages according to their purpose.  There are
>>> a few exceptions, such as python.scm, which would best be split up.  If
>>> possible I’d rather have JavaScript libraries in modules that indicate
>>> what their purpose is.  General purpose frameworks, on the other hand,
>>> could very well fit in a javascript.scm.
>>
>> I think mathjax being a kind of library, should be put in a
>> javascript.scm with a "javascript-" prefix. This is similar to the way
>> we treat python libraries with a "python-" prefix, emacs
>> packages/libraries with a "emacs-" prefix, etc. WDYT?
>
> Sounds good.  I would prefer a shorter prefix, though, such as “js-”.
> We use “cl-” for Common Lisp, and I’m glad I don’t need to type so much
> :)

Ok, "js-" then! :-)