Re: bnv_have_qt

[Bastiaan Veelo]

Peter Simons wrote:

> If you have libxml (or any other sgml/xml validator)
> installed, you can validate the macro by calling:
>
>  xmllint --valid --noout bnv_have_qt.xml
>
> That's how I found the syntax error (an unterminated <tt>
> tag). There isn't much of a generation process: The
> documentation tag contains pure XHTML 1.0. You can check how
> it is layouted with any web browser.
>  

It is too complicated: cut and paste the documentation tag to see the 
layout, cut and paste the m4 source to check the macro... Not a 
maintenance-friendly concept.

> Anyway, back on topic: What do we do with BNV_HAVE_QT? ;-)
> Since making the greater changes obviously won't happen
> overnight, I think we have only two choices right now:
>
> (a) Convert it back to legacy markup. This loses some
>     formatting, but solves all other problems for the
>     moment.
>
> (b) Commit a pseudo-macro in the legacy tree that tells the
>     user to go to www.gnu.org/.../bnv_have_qt.html for the
>     real thing, so that sf.net is no longer out-of-sync.
>     It's a kludge, but allows the macro to remain in the
>     new format ... should that be desirable.
>
> Bastiaan, it's your macro. What do you think?
>  

I opt for going back to legacy. You can decide to keep the XML in an 
"experimental" branch to play with, but the legacy one should be the one 
everybody uses, and that will be the one that I maintain. Thanks for all 
the work, Peter, and I am honored to have been the first one getting 
this attention, but enough is enough :-)

Since it is your archive, you can do the moving ;-)

Thanks,
Bastiaan.