[See at end ... ] On Tue, 2018-04-10 at 18:05 +0100, Colin Watson wrote: > On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 03:57:19PM +0100, Deri James wrote: > > To avoid making existing documents render incorrectly I propose to allow > > the > > existing behaviour to be selected. Adding this to the NEWS file:- > > > > ============================================================================ > > PDFPIC has now been corrected, so the behaviour is the same whether you use > > the postscript or pdf drivers. However, this means that any documents which > > were written using the old behaviour will not be rendered correctly if > > using > > the pdf driver with the new version. > > > > The change would mean that documents which relied on the previous behaviour > > are likely to have a gap underneath the image which was not there before. > > If > > you see this effect there are three ways you can restore the previous > > behaviour (listed in order of priority):- > > > > A) Add the line ".nr PDFPIC_LEGACY 1" to the document before the first call > > to > > .PDFPIC. > > > > B) If it is just a single document which exhibits this behaviour you can > > run > > groff adding "-rPDFPIC_LEGACY=1" to the command-line. > > I don't have a specific name suggestion, and I'm aware that this is a > bikeshed, but can I suggest a more explicit variable name? Otherwise > the next time some old behaviour needs to be switchably deprecated we're > in for some confusion. > > (In my third year in college, I lived in "New Court", built in 1825.)
[ ... therefore, along with Ralph Corderoy and Peter Schaffter, you constitute a Trinity ... ]
