[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: makeinfo 4.7

From: David Kastrup
Subject: Re: makeinfo 4.7
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2006 01:03:59 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux)

Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:

>> Cc: address@hidden,  address@hidden
>> From: David Kastrup <address@hidden>
>> Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2006 00:30:01 +0200
>> > I thought the GNU project was about being able to modify the manual,
>> > not only use whatever is shipped with the tarballs.
>> If you are modifying the manual, you can be expected to be using
>> development tools that are not from the stone age.
> If it is really necessary to ask them to upgrade, I agree.  But this
> is not our case.  Are you saying we should ask people to upgrade for
> no good reason at all?
>> That is nothing an inexperienced user would do.
> There's nothing in "make info" that requires any particular
> experience, IMO.

"make info" will not do anything in a released tarball unless you
touched the manual sources.

>> > On top of that, a large number of users who aren't developers are
>> > using the CVS code, where you must have Texinfo to produce the
>> > manual.
>> Again, this is nothing an inexperienced user would do.
> I think you should check your facts.  It is no longer true that only
> hackers use the CVS code.

Inexperienced users use CVS code somebody else compiled.  Basically
all GNU/Linux distributions provide some emacs-snapshot package, and
there are several precompiled offers for MacOSX and Windows.

I don't see somebody juggling with CVS and compiling himself and so on
use a makeinfo from several years ago and being unable to upgrade.

It just does not make sense.

David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]