X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1039" "Thu" "20" "May" "1999" "16:28:57" "+0200" "Lars =?iso-8859-1?Q?Hellstr=F6m?=" "Lars.Hellstrom@MATH.UMU.SE" nil "19" "Re: The bugs in the doc package" "^Date:" nil nil "5" nil "The bugs in the doc package" nil nil nil] nil) Received: from listserv.gmd.de (listserv.gmd.de [192.88.97.1]) by mail.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id QAA31997; Thu, 20 May 1999 16:29:09 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from mail.listserv.gmd.de (192.88.97.5) by listserv.gmd.de (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <10.57A8CEE2@listserv.gmd.de>; Thu, 20 May 1999 16:29:05 +0200 Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 431396 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Thu, 20 May 1999 16:29:03 +0200 Received: from mail.math.umu.se (root@abel.math.umu.se [130.239.20.139]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id QAA02346 for ; Thu, 20 May 1999 16:29:01 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [130.239.20.144] (mac144.math.umu.se [130.239.20.144]) by mail.math.umu.se (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id QAA00881 for ; Thu, 20 May 1999 16:28:59 +0200 (MET DST) X-Sender: lars@abel.math.umu.se References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de id QAA02348 Message-ID: Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 16:28:57 +0200 From: Lars =?iso-8859-1?Q?Hellstr=F6m?= Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L Subject: Re: The bugs in the doc package Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 3284 Martin Schr"oder wrote: >Which bugreport do you mean? All regarding those problems are closed. I seriously doubt the value of a continued debate about this matter---it is obvious I was wrong, and I have apologized---but since you make a direct question, I suppose I must answer it. Yes, all those (or at least many of them, I see no reason to doubt you in this matter) bug reports are closed, and in the best of all worlds (which we do not live in) this would imply that a fixed version of doc was available. My original contribution was based on the false impression that no fixed version was available, and that no apparent work was being made on making one available either---a state of things that would indicate that something had gone really wrong with the bug report answering. I feel that such a state of things (which in this particular case turned out not to be the true state of things) would constitute legitimate grounds for making the claims I made. I hope we thereby can put an end to this awkward debate. Lars Hellström