I think you have to break up the docs, too. Robby
On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 5:20 PM, Michael W <mwil...@uccs.edu> wrote: > Thanks for your help, everyone! > > Now that you mention it, splitting the package up seems like the > lesser of the two evils. > > What about documentation? How can I document two modules in one > document without requiring both of them? Or, assuming I split the > docs up too, is there any sane way of making binding links or > even just manual hyperlinks across planet packages? > > (Sorry, Neil! I accidentally sent this message to only him -- > shoulda clicked "Reply to All") > > 20 hours ago, Neil Van Dyke wrote: >> Carl Eastlund wrote at 01/27/2012 10:24 PM: >> > I suggest you require the rsound package directly, and either split >> > your package in two to reduce dependencies or just live with a >> > possibly unnecessary dependency. >> >> +1 >> >> Also, from a reusability perspective, I think Michael W has the right >> idea with producing a few related-but-separate packages, rather than one >> mega package. >> > ____________________ > Racket Users list: > http://lists.racket-lang.org/users ____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
