Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 10:01:32 -0700 From: "Bruce A. Mah" <bmah@freebsd.org> To: Nik Clayton <nik@freebsd.org> Cc: doc@freebsd.org Subject: Re: OpenJade and TeTeX (was: Re: Building the FTP tree (was Re: en_US/books/handbook/book.pd* b0rken)) Message-ID: <20030408170132.GA47828@intruder.bmah.org> In-Reply-To: <20030329130325.GG875@clan.nothing-going-on.org> References: <20030313152137.GA97343@nevermind.kiev.ua> <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>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--FCuugMFkClbJLl1L Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable [Moving doceng@ discussion to doc@ as per suggestion.] If memory serves me right, Nik Clayton wrote: > On Mon, Mar 17, 2003 at 03:14:06PM -0800, Bruce A. Mah wrote: > > > I'm also going to test (probably tomorrow, now) OpenJade with this > > > environment, to get thumbnails in the PDF output. > >=20 > > You mean bookmarks, right? None of my OpenJade builds have ever given > > me thumbnails, but bookmarks work like a charm. >=20 > I did indeed mean bookmarks. I've just tested it here, and as you say, > it works like a charm. >=20 > I'm really quite impressed with that. Yeah. It looks quite spiffy. > So the suggestion is two-fold: >=20 > 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@. 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? Once #2 is done, #1 is easy. =46rom a RE standpoint (er, this RE's standpoint), now is a good time, since we just finished a release and the next one is two months away. Bruce. 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. --FCuugMFkClbJLl1L Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE+kwBr2MoxcVugUsMRAiyPAJ9gqH5GDho2wFJ3Rur5PkliLk7TXACgj5N0 NVyh/xI3CWezwl5Pvk0ARSc= =iKz3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --FCuugMFkClbJLl1L--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030408170132.GA47828>