Am Dienstag, den 05.09.2006, 16:30 +0900 schrieb Michael(tm) Smith: > If you were to change the Debian docbook-xsl package such that it > uses /etc/papersize as a default papersize instead of using > "letter", as the upstream docs say, then you run the risk of a > users discovering that every time they generate FO output, they > are getting a different default thatn what the upstream docs say > they should be getting, and them perhaps having no idea why that > is happening.
True. > I suppose that if you implemented this, we could > update the upstream docs to say that the default is "letter" > except on Debian, where it's whatever is specified in > /etc/papersize. I thought about simply patching the docs in the debian package along with the param.xsl adding a notes - that we (Debian) try to read /etc/papersize to get the value and fall back to the described default - that this is limited to only reading /etc/papersize (PAPERSIZE and PAPERCONF cannot be examined) - that more info is in README.Debian (necessary commands) I don't think, that this should be put in upstream docs directly. I would maybe suggest (if you like the idea of reading the libpaper config), that you implement this in the XSL2 stylesheets using unparsed-text() of a file, set to /etc/papersize by default. The implementation for XSL1 is more a (working) workaround. But XSL2 offers the possibilities to do this, so it could be implemented. > But we've never put anything system-specific into > the upstream docs before, and IMHO, this wouldn't really merit a > setting a precedent for doing that. See above. Don't put anything system specific into the docs. It's also possible, that one day this patch will be dropped, because of a better solution or any issues and then upstream docs may be outdated (and wrong) then. So I really don't think it's a good idea to put this into upstream docs. Regards, Daniel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
