Re: Shall the Haskell Report remain in LaTeX?

[John Wiegley]

> "DS" == Doaitse Swierstra  writes:

SD> The good thing about laTeX is that out of all the candidates it is the
SD> most likely one to still work 40 years from now,

+1 from me for LaTeX as well.

-- 
John Wiegley  GPG fingerprint = 4710 CF98 AF9B 327B B80F
http://newartisans.com  60E1 46C4 BD1A 7AC1 4BA2
___
Haskell-prime mailing list
Haskell-prime@haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime

Re: Shall the Haskell Report remain in LaTeX?

[Doaitse Swierstra]

The good thing about laTeX is that out of all the candidates it is the most 
likely one to still work 40 years from now,

Doaitse



> Op 9 sep. 2017, om 15:40  heeft Herbert Valerio Riedel  
> het volgende geschreven:
> 
> Hello *,
> 
> On 2017-09-08 at 00:46:52 +0200, Mario Blazevic wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
>>> If the report was written in reStructuredText we could simply use
>>> something like the readthedocs.org service. But since it's LaTeX, we
>>> have to do a little bit more work to publishes ("deploys" in newspeak)
>>> .pdf drafts somewhere else, but it's doable.
>>> 
>>> I can take care to set it up, if it's clear what kind of CI/CD we want.
> 
>> Is the current publishing system really that difficult?
> 
> No, it's not that bad, it's just that there likely won't be a service
> that'll work out of the box with GitHub integration like readthedocs...
> 
>> To my grizzled ears, this sounds like you're fishing for a volunteer
>> to translate LaTeX to ReST. I'd actually be willing to do that, as I
>> have plenty of experience with text transformations, but I'd need a
>> buy-in from everybody.
> 
> ...but I wouldn't go as far as to suggest this is reason enough to
> translate the report into .rst
> 
> I guess I was rather trying to fish for some commitment that we want in
> fact to stay with LaTeX; I was planning to pick up where I left things
> in 2015 and clean up/refactor the TeX text and also investigate what our
> current options are to generate state-of-the-art .pdf, .html and .epub
> output. And I'd like to avoid this resulting a waste of effort in case
> we decide to move away from LaTeX in the foreseeable future...
> 
> Long story short, is everyone ok to stay with (La)TeX, or is there some
> compelling reason that would justify migrating to a different
> documentation system?
> 
> -- hvr
> ___
> Haskell-prime mailing list
> Haskell-prime@haskell.org
> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime

___
Haskell-prime mailing list
Haskell-prime@haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime

Re: Shall the Haskell Report remain in LaTeX?

[Mario Blažević]

On 2017-10-31 05:28 AM, Nicolas Wu wrote:

It’s a yes from me for us to be using LaTeX, but I think it might be useful to 
use lhs2TeX to generate the LaTeX.

lhs2TeX makes it possible for us to write literate Haskell files as the source 
to the Report, which in turn allows us to type-check much of the code we write, 
which is nice.



	If we agree to use lhs2TeX, we can migrate the Haskell code fragments 
incrementally, after we check in the existing report. I suppose that 
would be just another RFC pull request, so feel free to submit it.




Best wishes,

Nick




On 30 Oct 2017, at 15:39, Mario Blažević  wrote:

On 2017-09-09 09:40 AM, Herbert Valerio Riedel wrote:

Long story short, is everyone ok to stay with (La)TeX, or is there some
compelling reason that would justify migrating to a different
documentation system?



Since nobody said no in the 7 weeks since, I think it's safe to assume yes. Can 
we proceed with this now?

Once the report is a part of the RFCs repository, I assume it will become the 
proper home that pull requests https://github.com/haskell/haskell-report/pull/3 
(if also accompanied by an RFC).


___
Haskell-prime mailing list
Haskell-prime@haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime

Re: Shall the Haskell Report remain in LaTeX?

[Nicolas Wu]

It’s a yes from me for us to be using LaTeX, but I think it might be useful to 
use lhs2TeX to generate the LaTeX.

lhs2TeX makes it possible for us to write literate Haskell files as the source 
to the Report, which in turn allows us to type-check much of the code we write, 
which is nice.

Best wishes,

Nick



> On 30 Oct 2017, at 15:39, Mario Blažević  wrote:
> 
> On 2017-09-09 09:40 AM, Herbert Valerio Riedel wrote:
>> Long story short, is everyone ok to stay with (La)TeX, or is there some
>> compelling reason that would justify migrating to a different
>> documentation system?
> 
> 
> Since nobody said no in the 7 weeks since, I think it's safe to assume yes. 
> Can we proceed with this now?
> 
> Once the report is a part of the RFCs repository, I assume it will become the 
> proper home that pull requests 
> https://github.com/haskell/haskell-report/pull/3 (if also accompanied by an 
> RFC).
> 
> 
> ___
> Haskell-prime mailing list
> Haskell-prime@haskell.org
> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime

___
Haskell-prime mailing list
Haskell-prime@haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime