>
>
> My suggestion is: For everything that depends on AUCTeX, prefix it with
> auctex-, and for others which work with built-in mode as well, take tex-
> as prefix.  Rationale: it makes things easier to find once you do 'M-x
> list-packages RET'.
>

Copy.  So maybe "auctex-numbering" (or "auctex-latex-numbering"?) and
"auctex-latexmk-continuous"?  (unless these are considered suitable for
upstreaming, in which case the point is moot)


> >> I'd be happy with whatever makes the most sense, but figured submitting
> to
> >> ELPA would make them readily available without introducing additional
> >> burden on the AUCTeX maintainers.
> >
> > I'll let the AUCTeX maintainers decide.  That being said, I am sure
> > they'd always appreciate a helping hand in general.
>
> Disussion about upstreaming parts of Paul's code would be the next step,
> I think, based on user feedback and request.


Let me know what, if anything, I should do to help with this.


> Reg. helping hands: Always
> welcome, but I really wish that people take over which actually use
> LaTeX/AUCTeX/RefTeX on a regular basis.  I can tell for Tassilo and
> myself that we don't use LaTeX anymore, and that for many years now.
>

I qualify as a long-time daily user of latex/auctex (and until fairly
recently, reftex), but am ignorant of tex more broadly.  Happy to help how
I can.


> (I tried to help as far as I could).
>
>
(Thanks again!)