Update of bug #59906 (project groff):
Severity: 3 - Normal => 1 - Wish
Status: Need Info => Wont Fix
Assigned to: None => gbranden
Open/Closed: Open => Closed
_______________________________________________________
Follow-up Comment #2:
The status quo has been documented for a long time, so this is really a wish
list request more than a bug report; updating severity.
I'm also steadily becoming less convinced that the fixed-width semantics of GW
are worth the candle.
It seems as easy to just tell people to use MINGW with its lower-bound
semantics as it does to warn GW users that groff ms supports the register but
gives a different meaning.
And it's not like groff ms even works in compatibility mode. If someone has
an ms document that they want to format with historical troff+ms and GNU
troff+ms, they can write conditionals using \n(.g. I'm not sure _what_ they'd
do if they wanted control of the gutter width in such a document, however.
In fact, I think I've talked myself out of wanting this. Someone who has a
use case for it can reopen this ticket or re-raise the matter on the
discussion list.
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?59906>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/
