On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 3:35 AM, James Fisher <jameshfis...@gmail.com> wrote:
> - In my humble opinion, TeXies need to get out of the habit of > 'self-documenting' TeX using TeX itself. TeX is not some replacement for > all markup, it's for producing beautiful books (OK, and some presentations); I think that "self-documenting" in TeX is 20year olds now --- it started with Latex209 ,I believe. > So, thoughts? Yes from http://sphinx.pocoo.org/ "Sphinx is a tool that makes it easy to create intelligent and beautiful documentation" but I believe that ConTeXt is better " * Output formats: HTML (including Windows HTML Help) and LaTeX, for printable PDF versions" Are you suggesting to use LaTeX to document ConTeXt source ? About model of development: one developer is not so strange afterall . In other situations maybe this is not adequate, in this situation actually it's the best choice (where for my experience "actually" goes from 10year ago until now). For example mkii is frozen while mkiv is at 50%, if we consider that luatex 0.50 is at 50%, and luatex 1.0 will be 100%: btw mkiv is really usable, not in some fuzzy alpha state (frozen is not a bad word : tex is frozen from ~1990, pdftex is "cold", ie changes a little, luatex is "hot") This model doesn't imply that you cannot contribute to the code base but only that all contributions need to be validate (and possible rejected) and integrate by developer,. You can also contribute with third part modules, but they are not in base code and in case of conflicts code base wins. There is no need for a public dcvs : for mkiv there is always one beta version, the last one. Errors will be fixed in next beta. This imply that you must be prepared to patch your macros/stylesheets to match with last version Patrick thinks that a public git is a good idea and me too, but one can always manage his personal dcvs --- which is a good idea to understand code evolution on a particularly subject (I believe the Arthur has an historical archive ) For comparison, luatex project is developed in "traditional" manner: svn, bug tracker, manual (in context mkii ): the code base is in C with target CWEB . You can think at luatex as low-level layer which development is driven by mkiv, a very high level layer, which development is influenced by luatex itself (a sort of negative feedback see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Control_theory) As I said the language and its semantic are particularly , almost unique. Nothing strange that there is an ad hoc model of development -- luigi ___________________________________________________________________________________ If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki! maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context webpage : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net archive : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/ wiki : http://contextgarden.net ___________________________________________________________________________________
