Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 10:36:08 -0700 From: Murray Stokely <murray@freebsd.org> To: "Bruce A. Mah" <bmah@freebsd.org> Cc: Nik Clayton <nik@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: OpenJade and TeTeX (was: Re: Building the FTP tree (was Re: en_US/books/handbook/book.pd* b0rken)) Message-ID: <20030408103608.C43794@freebsdmall.com> In-Reply-To: <20030408170132.GA47828@intruder.bmah.org>; from bmah@freebsd.org on Tue, Apr 08, 2003 at 10:01:32AM -0700 References: <20030313153404.GB18271@intruder.bmah.org> <7mptovi7wc.wl@black.imgsrc.co.jp> <20030313122030.C25592@freebsdmall.com> <20030314001033.GC72128@clan.nothing-going-on.org> <20030316234847.GA25279@clan.nothing-going-on.org> <20030317223030.GD1051@clan.nothing-going-on.org> <20030317230702.GF1051@clan.nothing-going-on.org> <20030317231406.GA19216@intruder.bmah.org> <20030329130325.GG875@clan.nothing-going-on.org> <20030408170132.GA47828@intruder.bmah.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--p/1JFEOz/hVXxMAZ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Apr 08, 2003 at 10:01:32AM -0700, Bruce A. Mah wrote: > > 1. Remove the hack in the Handbook's PDF build process to use > > tex, since the new port can handle the size of the Handbook. > >=20 > > 2. Switch to OpenJade for the build to get bookmarks in the PDF > > files. > >=20 > > Thoughts? We should probably shift this discussion over to doc@. >=20 > The only problem I see with #2 is that it'll probably take a flag day > to do this. If we switch the doc infrastructure to use OpenJade (with > or without an override), then existing Jade-based toolchains will > break. I think the benefits outweigh the costs but I am uncertain how > best to proceed. Do we give lots of advance warning via multiple > HEADSUP messages and just go for it? As long as we continue to support Jade via 'USE_JADE' or something similar then this sounds like a good idea to me. > PS. For newcomers: The issue is whether to switch to using OpenJade > (rather than Jade) for all doc builds. OpenJade is under active > development, and we are forced to use OpenJade on the 64-bit platforms > anyways. At one point, there were concerns about OpenJade's ability > to handle non-English languages, but my impression is that those have > been resolved. It seems many people are generally under the assumption that OpenJade is under "active" development, but the last I checked that really wasn't the case. I had some patches to commit and they even gave me commit access on sourceforge ISTR but there was hardly anyone actually doing any work. When I've worked with it I have indeed found some cool new stuff, but I also have found other parts broken that "just worked" with regular jade. Have they started doing regular releases? I don't mean to be negative, because I have not evaluated OpenJade in over a year. I just want us to keep this in mind and move forward cautiously and not just because of misconceptions. So, do not break my jade setup (which may have special hacks for my print-output activities) to do this. You can switch the default to OpenJade, but regular jade must still be supported. - Murray --p/1JFEOz/hVXxMAZ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iD8DBQE+kweRtNcQog5FH30RAhUlAJ9q5mU5FIS+ENJQGmxOw5HghjhGnwCeMdJi gO4f/z5ZZT1uD143LLqOADM= =9Q2U -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --p/1JFEOz/hVXxMAZ--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030408103608.C43794>