> > > Looks like this is still sitting in Incoming. Obviously it's not > > > going into potato. > > It's not, but I can't find any reason for not including it. It's an > > isolated package, with just one binary, and considered stable by the > > upstream author. > That may be, but it's already outdated (it implements an older version > of the spec), so it will only confuse people when they can finally buy > potato CDs in a couple of months.
Nah.. > > > Anyhow, when it gets into woody, let me know, and > > > I'll add it to task-sgml ... or would it be task-sgml-dev ? > > task-sgml? wouldn't that be task-xml? > I hope you're joking. If we create more task-* packages that depend on > let's say 10 packages each, we could still wind up with 400 task-* > packages. > > The "sgml" in task-sgml should be read the same way as in debian-sgml. > I'd like to hear from the sgml people who are sure they'll never touch > xml, and the xml people who won't touch useful stuff like jade, sp, > psgml, etc because they're really sgml tools. Hum.. no.. but if there will be just one, it should be XML, that is the mor important and visible now.
