At 2020-11-13T07:39:58-0600, Dave Kemper wrote: > The *roff concepts rewrite > (http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/groff/2020-10/msg00013.html) and > the ms manual update > (http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/groff/2020-10/msg00165.html) aren't > in this rc. Are they targeted for this release?
The very good reason they're not in rc1 is that I haven't committed them yet. The ms.ms revision isn't done yet. The concepts thing is stuck because I've been dithering about adapting it, with various deletions, into (1) ms.ms (after the introduction, before the registers and strings material); (2) roff(7), because it would be good to get those basic typesetting concepts into man page and into the reader's brain before that highly detailed history section; and (3) groff_man_style(7), because as it says it's intended to be comprehensible as the only document a man page author who knows how to drive a text editor but with no further amibitions needs to read. Thoughts on the above are most welcome. > Also, most of the hyphenation data imported from TeX (see > http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?57594) was last updated in the 2006-2007 > time frame. Is it possible to resynchronize these files for this > release? This does seem like a good idea. It will be easy to regression-test changes to the _English_ hyphenation patterns; I'll see them as part of my before-and-aftering on the 60 man pages. > These are both extensive changes, so perhaps it's not appropriate to > consider them at this stage. At the same time, it would be a shame if > they had to wait for the next go-round, especially all the work > Branden has put in to the manuals. The documentation updates, at > least, have little chance of breaking anything. The hyphenation data > updates are higher risk but still on the low end. I agree. Is anyone besides me willing to undertake this? I've never dealt with TeX hyphenation files before. Apart from knowing what our docs says about them I'm totally cold on this. Regards, Branden
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
