From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB095BC04 for ; Tue, 27 Jun 2006 00:21:49 +0200 (CEST) Received: from nz-out-0102.google.com (nz-out-0102.google.com [64.233.162.195]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k5QMLnri000917 for ; Tue, 27 Jun 2006 00:21:50 +0200 Received: by nz-out-0102.google.com with SMTP id 4so42464nzn for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2006 15:21:48 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=XldUcHp4yeML6y4J+Oipvk1b9PLznyICtOqc4NAW8oXcJobH6s4rmNlgzGCG96NxD81nyLXKHUTpIi8IIAUCISeMP3yCUdnGf2dX06Jh7iQFRJSwrRxisbQCVrwMyz/Ss/X7bQRkebytke9L3q0a8548hE3JlBb+zqiDBFsGAj0= Received: by 10.36.58.12 with SMTP id g12mr230605nza; Mon, 26 Jun 2006 15:21:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.36.133.5 with HTTP; Mon, 26 Jun 2006 15:21:48 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 15:21:48 -0700 From: "Nathaniel Gray" To: "Nicolas Pouillard" Subject: Re: [Caml-list] New camlp4 Cc: "Caml Mailing List" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 44A05DFD.001 on nez-perce : j-chkmail score : X : 0/20 1 X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 44A05DFD.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; camlp:01 camlp:01 cvs:01 wrote:01 wrote:01 caml-list:01 caltech:02 caltech:02 nicolas:02 nicolas:02 repository:04 beta:04 beta:04 inria:06 anybody:07 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.3 (2005-04-27) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.4 required=5.0 tests=DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE,RCVD_BY_IP autolearn=disabled version=3.0.3 On 6/23/06, Nicolas Pouillard wrote: > On 6/23/06, Nathaniel Gray wrote: > > I'm about to start a new project using camlp4 and I'm wondering > > whether to use the "beta" updated version of camlp4 [1] or the version > > that comes with 3.09. If the beta version is truly going to become > > the official version of camlp4 in the future then I'll go that way, > > but I don't recall seeing any official word to that effect. > > > > Can anybody clear this up or make a recommendation? > > > > The integration in the official CVS repository is imminent, just a few > days to wait :) Great! Thanks! -- >>>-- Nathaniel Gray -- Caltech Computer Science ------> >>>-- Mojave Project -- http://mojave.cs.caltech.edu -->