On 9/1/24 16:10, Dave Kemper wrote:
On 1/8/24, Robert Thorsby <rob...@thorsby.com.au> wrote:
My apologies to the list for the intemperance of my language, but this
has to stop.
"This" being novices posting suggestions without understanding every
nook and cranny of groff? I couldn't disagree more. If an idea has
problems, the way newbies learn is by having those problems pointed
out. Railing against the mere temerity of proposing a change--without
even saying what's wrong with the proposal--is less helpful. I'm not
a groff novice, and I can't make out what exactly you're objecting to,
since your one specific reference to a section of the manual doesn't
cover what you seem to think it does.
All knowledge levels should feel welcome here.
You are, of course, right Dave. I was railing against people
automatically assuming that if they can't get things to work as they
expect then it is "groff's fault" and can only be fixed by redefining
something or other.
Newbies have always been welcome on this list but, until recently,
newbies would post a problem they were having and the good folk on the
list would show them the way, or suggest a workaround, or explain why
the problem was currently unsolvable. I am always in favour of that
approach, and have been on the receiving end of solutions and
workarounds to my problems.
But, jumping in with "patches" without any understanding of groff is
not, IMO, the way to do it. It is to this that I am vehemently opposed.
I apologize for not making myself clear in my earlier post.
Robert Thorsby
