On 27 March 2012 17:41, Gour <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, 27 Mar 2012 09:38:11 +1100 > Lex Trotman <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Yes, the manual is technically wrong, it should say "The text >> attribute formatting is not defined *by default* for PDF toolchains, >> however most toolchains can be configured to do so.". Simply saying >> it doesn't work is too harsh. > > /me nods > >> And when it works for you we can add a FAQ showing how you did it. > > Nice deal. ;) > >> Asciidoc is used by many commercial organisations, who don't highlight >> the fact, but one that does is O'Rielly (the publishers of slim >> pamphlets on computing topics :) who recently open sourced a tool they >> used to reverse engineer Asciidoc from docbook. > > Interesting... > >> As for your worries about the survival of Asciidoc note that its >> public release is 10 years old this year. > > Yeah, but I just wonder if it was always (almost) one-man-show?
I am only a relative newcomer having only a couple of years involvement with Asciidoc so I can't tell from personal experience, but I note that the changelog has more "thanks to", "patch by" and "reported by" now than it had in the dim distant past. The single committer model may not be the "process du jour" but it suits a mature project like Asciidoc and ensures consistent quality and adherance to the projects principles. Please note I'm not trying to belittle your concern, its a valid one, but I think in this case it is not as significant. Even if (whichever of your gods forbid) Stuart disappeared tomorrow, the source is still on Googlecode and many people have copies so we could always get things going again. Cheers Lex -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "asciidoc" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/asciidoc?hl=en.
