At 2024-01-24T02:26:44+0000, Bjarni Ingi Gislason wrote: > This is a regression (not backward compatible)
It's a _change_. That's why it's documented in the ChangeLog file. It is a change that can have a significant measurable effect on user documents. That's why it's documented in the NEWS file. > caused by Branden acting as a developer (not as a maintainer). If you want something "maintained" at a point of stagnation, the easy and obvious thing to do is to pick a version of groff that you're satisfied with and never upgrade it. > This is the second case of this kind of a bug (bug #65077), I figured some people would notice; that is why it is documented in the NEWS file. > see for example "CSTR #54", chapter 5, about the 'ns' request or > the "groff.info" (info groff) and groff(7) (incomplete). More relevant to this topic is Lesk's paper on the ms macro package, "Typing Documents on the UNIX System".[1] It falls unfortunately short of a strict specification, and unlike later macro packages' manuals, it does not offer an explicit list of formatter requests that are "safe" to use with it. In areas where a system is not specified, divergence can be expected among multiple implementations. Further, the `DD` display distance, at issue here, register was not even a feature of Lesk/AT&T ms, but an innovation by 4.2BSD. The relevant paper for this is by Tuthill.[2] It also did not mention how it interacted with no-space mode, nor with how vertical spacing was expected to accumulate (or not) with inter-paragraph spacing or spacing before section headings. See <https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?64531>. Decisions had to be made. I made ones that made groff render Kernighan & Cherry's "Typesetting Mathematics" paper render reasonably well.[3] > Macros for historical documents should be put into a separate > directory (e.g., tmac/historical), which can then be searched > with the '-M <directory>' option. If someone wants to contribute precise work-alikes for historical implementation of macro packages, we have a mechanism and place for that--the "contrib" directory, and it can be accessed as you describe. But someone has to step up, do the work, and do it conscientiously. Among other matters, they should employ a GPL-compatible Free Software license if they want groff to adopt it, and they should avoid plagiarizing historical macro package implementations. > The user should have control, not a committer. The user _has_ control. groff is Free Software. You know this because you maintain your own private fork of groff, and your failure to measure the GNU version of it has led you repeatedly to file defect reports that are inapplicable to GNU groff, arising from observations you make of your own changes.[4] > Read the "mission statement" in > https://www.gnu.org/software/groff/ I'm familiar with it. If you mean to charge me with infidelity to its objectives, you are going to have to be specific regarding which goal you feel I have frustrated. If you can't do that, then your attempt at deploying it to lend your argument weight is counterfeit. Regards, Branden [1] https://minnie.tuhs.org/cgi-bin/utree.pl?file=V7/usr/doc/msmacros/ms [2] https://minnie.tuhs.org/cgi-bin/utree.pl?file=4.2BSD/usr/doc/msmacros/ms.diffs [3] https://github.com/g-branden-robinson/retypesetting-mathematics [4] https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/index.php?go_report=Apply&group=groff&func=&set=custom&msort=0&report_id=225&advsrch=0&bug_id=&summary=bjarnigroff&submitted_by=0&resolution_id=0&assigned_to=0&bug_group_id=0&status_id=0&severity=0&category_id=0&plan_release_id=0&history_search=0&history_field=0&history_event=modified&history_date_dayfd=24&history_date_monthfd=1&history_date_yearfd=2024&chunksz=50&spamscore=5&boxoptionwanted=1#options
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
