Re: [ELPA] New Package: p4_16-mode

[Philip Kaludercic]

Soham Gumaste <sohamg2@gmail.com> writes:

>> As mentioned in the last thread, I don't know if "p4_16" is a technical
>> term, but I know that it is an unusual symbol name, so I want to make
>> sure if it would be possible to call it p4-16 or something like that
>> instead.
>>
>
> Apologies for forgetting to reply to that part. So the language itself
> goes by "p4" or "p4lang" (think go/golang). The _14 and _16 refer to
> different diverging versions of the language. P4_14 is officially
> abandoned/deprecated (think python 2.7) and P4_16 is the "current
> revision of the p4 language" [1].
>
> That being said, I think "p4-16-mode" is clear enough to indicate
> which version is being implied and we could/should take the liberty to
> change the _ to a -. I am of the opinion that the "16" bit is
> necessary as the language itself is evolving. I do not see an issue
> with "p4-16-mode".

OK, the only thing which I believe is missing now is a "Version" tag in
the package header (see (info "(elisp) Simple Packages")).  A new
version of every ELPA package is released whenever a commit touches that
line.

> Thanks
>
> [1]: https://p4.org/specs/

-- 
Philip Kaludercic