Re: automake test driver for Guile scheme patch review

[Karl Berry]

Thanks for the replies.

MD> but I don't think it should be in Automake, because then the test
driver is harder to update

Fine by me :).

MD> I don't have any advise on how to get the automake maintainers

Sorry, I should have made it clear that I am, effectively, the automake
maintainer nowadays. Technically just a contributor, but no one else is
applying patches. (Jim Meyering is still making the releases, hopefully
with another one out before the end of the year.)

TS> Well, it's already a part of Automake as
contrib/test-driver.scm:

Sounds like I should remove it from there, since that version is stale,
as you both noted. It doesn't make sense to me to have a copy of a file
that is updated elsewhere. Better for it to be part of wherever it is
actually useful instead of putting me and laggard automake development
in the middle. Since it's been years since the initial patch+idea, and
no one has ever written about it, evidently the goal has been reached
outside of Automake.

TS> I think that doing nothing other than closing that patch would be a
reasonable course of action.  :)

It's nice to hear the same proposal twice :). Thus it shall be.

Freja, if you go forward with your project, evidently the conclusion is
that it's better to use the actively-maintained version in Guix.

--happy hacking, karl.

automake test driver for Guile scheme patch review

[Karl Berry]

Hello Guile folk - back in May 2016, Mathieu Lirzin submitted a patch to
add a test driver for Guile Scheme to Automake.
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/automake-patches/2016-05/msg0.html

It was never committed. It's been seven+ years, so before doing so, I
wanted to check if it was still useful, and valid. I know next to
nothing about Guile or Guix myself.

Please advise? If this is the wrong list, please forward? --thanks, karl.

(I'm not on this list, so please cc me with any replies.)

Re: makeinfo swallows page breaks

[Karl Berry]

Guileœôòùs Texinfo parser

Argh.  The idea of a full second Texinfo parser in GNU is fundamentally
wrong.  If you want to call it a Guile docstring parser, whose language
happens to bear some resemblance to a subset of Texinfo, fine.

Anyway, your change to use more Guile in the Guile build procedures
makes sense to me.

k

Re: two spaces after sentence + other doc janitorial duties

[Karl Berry]

[Sorry if there has been later replies on this.]

  Why is this the case? TeX itself gets this right, why can't makeinfo?

There is no overwhelming reason, it's just the historical fact that it's
never tinkered with intersentence spaces, aside from trying
half-heartedly to detect sentences at the end of lines.

rms wrote all this stuff originally, and in his world, the source files
all have two spaces at the end of sentences already, for the sake of
Emacs sentence commands.  So there was no reason for him to have
texinfo-format-buffer (or later makeinfo) to do anything.

Perhaps one day it will, it's on the wishlist, but don't hold your
breath.  Sorry.

karl

Re: guile licensing niglets

[Karl Berry]

Off-topic, but has there been any discussion of moving Guile to LGPLv3?

Not that I'm aware of, but it's a good question :).  Does anyone know if
any GPLv2-only (not GPLv2-or-later) applications use Guile?  That is the
main question.

Thanks,
Karl