Jesus - yes, there are huge religious wars fought over this arbitrary convention.

I actually prefer the nLab, Wikipedia and Borceaux convention, because a \$$\mathcal{V}\$$-enriched functor from \$$\mathcal{X} \times \mathcal{Y}^{\text{op}}\$$ to \$$\mathcal{V}\$$ can be reinterpreted as a functor from \$$\mathcal{X}\$$ to the so-called **presheaf category** \$$\mathcal{V}^{\mathcal{Y}^{\text{op}}}\$$, and that's a good thing. For example, the '\$$\mathcal{V}\$$-enriched Yoneda embedding' is a \$$\mathcal{V}\$$-enriched functor

$Y \colon \mathcal{X} \to \mathcal{V}^{\mathcal{X}^{\text{op}}} .$

However, Fong and Spivak use the convention I'm using here... and that's why I'm using it.

I disagree with a lot of their conventions; luckily, it doesn't really matter much which conventions you use.