Received: by nummer-3.proteosys id <01C19443.3CDCBC64@nummer-3.proteosys>; Thu, 3 Jan 2002 11:41:44 +0100 Return-Path: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C19443.3CDCBC64" x-vm-v5-data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil t t nil][nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil "^From:" nil nil nil]) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 x-vm-vheader: ("From:" "Sender:" "Resent-From" "To:" "Apparently-To:" "Cc:" "Subject:" "Date:" "Resent-Date:") nil x-vm-bookmark: 1 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Subject: RE: LATEX BUG REPORTED ON USENET Date: Fri, 1 Feb 1991 18:56:39 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: From: "LaTeX-L Mailing list" Sender: "MITTELBACH FRANK" To: "Rainer M. Schoepf" Reply-To: "LaTeX-L Mailing list" Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 284 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C19443.3CDCBC64 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Don, I haven't overlooked this mail. > > Now, I know that we are "working" on a replacement to the = \@startsection > stuff, but that doesn't change the fact that people currently use = LaTeX > as it stands now so we should be responsive to bug fixes. Actually a = bit > more than that: I would strongly recommend that we set a goal of > releasing a LaTeX 2.10 that would be LaTeX 2.09 with some bug fixes = plus > the new font selection scheme (including newlfont.sty or something = close > to it as the default) and whatever changes are necessary to allow that > to work properly. This includes an updated standard letter.sty. Yes, > Frank, I know you don't like it, but that's life. It's a two-line > modification to the style file. Not painful at all. It's more than that. One needs a suitable documentation for installing the stuff and certain other things would need to get fixed which can at the moment be classified as beta release misfeatures. For example, it does not make sense to keep the interface with \@setsize, --- or perhaps it does so that other old styles will work too. Another point is that I don't want people to get too deeply involved with programming the internals of the font selection scheme. They might change drastically (not the user interface) and this then results in new problems and complains. Being a beta-release the user who uses internal features knows that he/she might has to reprogram his/her styles when the final release comes out. If we call this 2.10 then it will be difficult to tell people to keep their hands away. On the other hand I see your point of showing people that there is work ongoing. This is perhaps the strongest point for it. I will think about it. BUT even if I finally think we should prepare it, I would need VOLUNTEERS. There is no point in cutting me to pieces. Frank ------_=_NextPart_001_01C19443.3CDCBC64 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable RE: LATEX BUG REPORTED ON USENET

Don, I haven't overlooked this mail.
>
> Now, I know that we are "working" on a = replacement to the \@startsection
> stuff, but that doesn't change the fact that = people currently use LaTeX
> as it stands now so we should be responsive to = bug fixes. Actually a bit
> more than that: I would strongly recommend that = we set a goal of
> releasing a LaTeX 2.10 that would be LaTeX 2.09 = with some bug fixes plus
> the new font selection scheme (including = newlfont.sty or something close
> to it as the default) and whatever changes are = necessary to allow that
> to work properly. This includes an updated = standard letter.sty. Yes,
> Frank, I know you don't like it, but that's = life. It's a two-line
> modification to the style file. Not painful at = all.

It's more than that. One needs a suitable = documentation for installing
the stuff and certain other things would need to get = fixed which can
at the moment be classified as beta release = misfeatures.
For example, it does not make sense to keep the = interface with
\@setsize, ---
or perhaps it does so that other old styles will work = too.

Another point is that I don't want people to get too = deeply involved
with programming the internals of the font selection = scheme. They
might change drastically (not the user interface) and = this then
results in new problems and complains. Being a = beta-release the
user who uses internal features knows that he/she = might has to
reprogram his/her styles when the final release comes = out.
If we call this 2.10 then it will be difficult to = tell people to
keep their hands away.

On the other hand I see your point of showing people = that there is
work ongoing. This is perhaps the strongest point for = it.
I will think about it.

BUT

even if I finally think we should prepare it, I would = need

VOLUNTEERS.

There is no point in cutting me to pieces.


Frank


------_=_NextPart_001_01C19443.3CDCBC64--