Bug#888468: pandoc: please support new YAML fields "front/back-notice" for LaTeX and HTML5 output
Quoting Francesco Poli (2018-06-17 19:50:22) > On Fri, 01 Jun 2018 12:28:45 -0700 John MacFarlane wrote: >> If you care about the feature, you may propose it upstream on the >> pandoc-discuss mailing list or the jgm/pandoc issue tracker on >> GitHub. That is the way it will be most convenient for upstream >> developers to consider it. > > I created that little patch and I sent it to the Debian package > maintainers, since I thought it could be useful for other people. > > But I am currently not intending to get more heavily involved in pandoc > upstream development. > And I cannot register an account or subscribe to a mailing list for > each and every upstream project I intend to make a little contribution > to. Sorry about that. > > I am open to constructive criticism about my patch (via e-mail, > please), if you, as pandoc upstream developer(s), are interested in > taking a look at it and, possibly, in adopting (a refined version of) > it. > But I do not have the time to jump through bureaucratic hoops, in > order to have the patch accepted upstream... Perfectly understandable. I will leave this bugreport open for a while, to see if John or others decide to drive your proposal further. Kind regards, - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: signature
Bug#888468: pandoc: please support new YAML fields "front/back-notice" for LaTeX and HTML5 output
On Fri, 01 Jun 2018 12:28:45 -0700 John MacFarlane wrote: > Francesco Poli writes: > > > On Fri, 01 Jun 2018 10:20:34 +0200 Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > If you don't want the Debian package to diverge from the upstream > > behavior, please, at least, forward my wishlist bug report (with my > > patch) upstream! > > This could speed up the upstream patch adoption process, I guess... [...] > > If you care about the feature, you may propose it upstream on the > pandoc-discuss mailing list or the jgm/pandoc issue tracker on GitHub. > That is the way it will be most convenient for upstream developers > to consider it. I created that little patch and I sent it to the Debian package maintainers, since I thought it could be useful for other people. But I am currently not intending to get more heavily involved in pandoc upstream development. And I cannot register an account or subscribe to a mailing list for each and every upstream project I intend to make a little contribution to. Sorry about that. I am open to constructive criticism about my patch (via e-mail, please), if you, as pandoc upstream developer(s), are interested in taking a look at it and, possibly, in adopting (a refined version of) it. But I do not have the time to jump through bureaucratic hoops, in order to have the patch accepted upstream... -- http://www.inventati.org/frx/ There's not a second to spare! To the laboratory! . Francesco Poli . GnuPG key fpr == CA01 1147 9CD2 EFDF FB82 3925 3E1C 27E1 1F69 BFFE pgpTCo6JCR8P2.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#888468: pandoc: please support new YAML fields "front/back-notice" for LaTeX and HTML5 output
Excerpts from John MacFarlane's message of juni 1, 2018 9:28 pm: Francesco Poli writes: If you don't want the Debian package to diverge from the upstream behavior, please, at least, forward my wishlist bug report (with my patch) upstream! What I meant to imply by my (recent) response was that no, I choose to not act as proxy for this bug specifically: One thing is copy-pasting your patch as-is, but another is refining it in dialogue with upstream and others that might chime in with helpful (or not) suggestions for improvements (or not). Simple copy-pasting I consider unneeded thanks to upstream following along here, and promoting it more actively is more work than I am willing to invest in this. This could speed up the upstream patch adoption process, I guess... Nope: I get no special treatment towards this upstream - my impression is the contrary: Those passionately contributing "interactively" by also discussing and evolving their patches get attention over plain "fixated" patches, I suspect. As upstream maintainer, I agree with Jonas's decision not to diverge from upstream. And I think Jonas is already doing enough work packaging pandoc; it's not his job to forward this to upstream. @John: Arguably it _is_ part of my job as package maintainer to pass bugreports upstream. But I get to decide how I prioritize my work, and since this is a wishlist issue I choose to no priority at all. If you care about the feature, you may propose it upstream on the pandoc-discuss mailing list or the jgm/pandoc issue tracker on GitHub. That is the way it will be most convenient for upstream developers to consider it. Thanks for clarifying, John. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private pgpOptTDRIDj_.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#888468: pandoc: please support new YAML fields "front/back-notice" for LaTeX and HTML5 output
Francesco Poli writes: > On Fri, 01 Jun 2018 10:20:34 +0200 Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > If you don't want the Debian package to diverge from the upstream > behavior, please, at least, forward my wishlist bug report (with my > patch) upstream! > This could speed up the upstream patch adoption process, I guess... As upstream maintainer, I agree with Jonas's decision not to diverge from upstream. And I think Jonas is already doing enough work packaging pandoc; it's not his job to forward this to upstream. If you care about the feature, you may propose it upstream on the pandoc-discuss mailing list or the jgm/pandoc issue tracker on GitHub. That is the way it will be most convenient for upstream developers to consider it.
Bug#888468: pandoc: please support new YAML fields "front/back-notice" for LaTeX and HTML5 output
On Fri, 01 Jun 2018 10:20:34 +0200 Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > Excerpts from Francesco Poli (wintermute)'s message of januar 26, 2018 12:28 > am: > > Well, I found out that adding support for this feature is really easy: > > one just needs to modify the templates used for LaTeX and HTML5 > > outputs. > > > > I prepared a patch for these two templates, supporting two new YAML > > fields named "front-notice" and "back-notice". > > > > Since I think this feature may be useful for other users, I would like > > to see my patch applied to the official default templates. > > Thanks for the proposed patch (and the nice words!). Thanks for following up on my bug report... > > I agree it is a small patch, but disagree to diverge from upstream for > this: Please propose upstream to adopt the change (or simply lean back > and wait: Upstream follows these bugreports so may decide to cherry-pick > on his own). Well, as I said in my original bug report: please apply my patch to the Debian package and forward my wishlist bug report upstream. If you don't want the Debian package to diverge from the upstream behavior, please, at least, forward my wishlist bug report (with my patch) upstream! This could speed up the upstream patch adoption process, I guess... > > Until (if ever) upstream decides to adopt the patch, please use the > Pandoc feature to feed it custom templates. This is indeed what I am doing, but it is a bit inconvenient, since my modifications will have to be re-adapted each time the default templates change (if ever). That's why I thought that such a harmless modification should be integrated into the Debian package and even more importantly into the upstream project. > > > Thanks again, Thanks to you! -- http://www.inventati.org/frx/ There's not a second to spare! To the laboratory! . Francesco Poli . GnuPG key fpr == CA01 1147 9CD2 EFDF FB82 3925 3E1C 27E1 1F69 BFFE pgp4p73MfNux0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#888468: pandoc: please support new YAML fields "front/back-notice" for LaTeX and HTML5 output
Excerpts from Francesco Poli (wintermute)'s message of januar 26, 2018 12:28 am: Well, I found out that adding support for this feature is really easy: one just needs to modify the templates used for LaTeX and HTML5 outputs. I prepared a patch for these two templates, supporting two new YAML fields named "front-notice" and "back-notice". Since I think this feature may be useful for other users, I would like to see my patch applied to the official default templates. Thanks for the proposed patch (and the nice words!). I agree it is a small patch, but disagree to diverge from upstream for this: Please propose upstream to adopt the change (or simply lean back and wait: Upstream follows these bugreports so may decide to cherry-pick on his own). Until (if ever) upstream decides to adopt the patch, please use the Pandoc feature to feed it custom templates. Thanks again, - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private pgpmyqyUT2Jxs.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#888468: pandoc: please support new YAML fields "front/back-notice" for LaTeX and HTML5 output
Package: pandoc Version: 1.19.2.4~dfsg-1+b1 Severity: wishlist Tags: patch Hello Debian Haskell Group! Thanks a lot for maintaining this really nice markup converter in Debian! The package is very useful and having it in Debian is greatly appreciated. While using it, I found that YAML metadata fields are useful for keeping some metadata about a markdown document in a compact block between a pair of "---" lines. So far so good. But, after reading the documentation, I seem to understand that (at least for the LaTeX, and hence PDF, output and for the HTML5 output) there is no YAML field suitable for inserting a notice (with customizable style) at the beginning (between title and TOC) or at the end of a document. This notice may possibly be useful to state the copyright and license terms for the document; it may also be used to state other pieces of information that should be displayed in a special area at the beginning or at the end of the document. Well, I found out that adding support for this feature is really easy: one just needs to modify the templates used for LaTeX and HTML5 outputs. I prepared a patch for these two templates, supporting two new YAML fields named "front-notice" and "back-notice". Since I think this feature may be useful for other users, I would like to see my patch applied to the official default templates. The patch is attached to this bug report: as you can see, it's almost trivial. Maybe it's so trivial that it is not even copyrighted. At any rate, in case it should turn out to be copyrighted by me, I hereby release it under the same terms as pandoc (that is to say, under the terms of the GNU GPL, version 2 or later). Please apply my patch to the Debian package and forward my wishlist bug report upstream. Thanks for your time and dedication! Bye. -- System Information: Debian Release: buster/sid APT prefers testing APT policy: (800, 'testing'), (500, 'unstable') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Kernel: Linux 4.14.0-3-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8), LANGUAGE=en_US:en (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system) LSM: AppArmor: enabled Versions of packages pandoc depends on: ii libc62.26-4 ii libffi6 3.2.1-8 ii libgmp10 2:6.1.2+dfsg-1.2 ii liblua5.1-0 5.1.5-8.1+b2 ii libluajit-5.1-2 2.1.0~beta3+dfsg-5.1 ii libpcre3 2:8.39-8 ii libyaml-0-2 0.1.7-2 ii pandoc-data 1.19.2.4~dfsg-1 ii zlib1g 1:1.2.8.dfsg-5 pandoc recommends no packages. Versions of packages pandoc suggests: pn context ii pandoc-citeproc0.10.5.1-1+b1 ii texlive-latex-extra2017.20180110-1 ii texlive-latex-recommended 2017.20180110-1 pn texlive-luatex ii texlive-xetex 2017.20180110-1 pn wkhtmltopdf -- no debconf information add-notice-to-templates.diff.gz Description: application/gzip
