Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 22:39:23 -0700 From: "Bruce A. Mah" <bmah@freebsd.org> To: Murray Stokely <murray@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: <20030409053923.GB52499@intruder.bmah.org> In-Reply-To: <20030408103608.C43794@freebsdmall.com> References: <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> <20030408103608.C43794@freebsdmall.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--CdrF4e02JqNVZeln Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable If memory serves me right, Murray Stokely wrote: > 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? >=20 > As long as we continue to support Jade via 'USE_JADE' or something > similar then this sounds like a good idea to me. OK, that's fair enough. There'll still be kind of a flag day but an easy way for people to deal with it. > > 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. >=20 > 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. Interesting. Do you remember what was broken? Both of them seem to work fine for the release documentation but that's pretty simple compared to some of the stuff that you did with the print Handbook. > Have they started doing regular releases? Well, in our ports tree, jade's last version upgrade was January 1999. openjade was last upgrade happened in February 2003, to a release from the project made in December 2002 (the prior release before that was January 2002). Admittedly an incomplete history... Actually, now that I look more closely I see mention of a patch to our jade port that's supposed to make it at least compile on sparc64 and ia64. Hmmm. Bruce. --CdrF4e02JqNVZeln Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE+k7IL2MoxcVugUsMRAj6PAJ9gC42f4EROz2XdJf7lqTU0LMlwtwCfcbJz KtV4OBETtvHE/ItzFCWO+ps= =sHpx -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --CdrF4e02JqNVZeln--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030409053923.GB52499>