> I'm not saying Texinfo should stagnate. I'm saying that we should
> try to introduce changes in a way that they will ``work'' (i.e. be
> silently ignored) by older versions of Texinfo processors.
OK. I've misunderstood you.
> Please try to think whether such a functionality can be introduced by
> extending an existing directive. For example, how about extending
> @ignore to produce the effect you want?
Nice idea. I haven't thought of that.
> > this avoids the version problem completely.
>
> Not true: if the user changes the Texinfo sources, she needs
> makeinfo that can process the modified sources. The freedom to
> change the docs is an important part of free software goals.
But shall we in that case really support a texinfo version from, say,
1995? Isn't it our right to ask for recent versions here? Consider
for example if you change something in configure.ac: The chances are
high that you have to use a new autoconf version to make it work. I
can't see a fundamental difference between source code files and
documentation. The process of modifying a texinfo file belongs to the
`maintainer' category, and people should have the necessary tools
IMHO.
Werner
_______________________________________________
Bug-texinfo mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-texinfo
