https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16658
--- Comment #4 from Guy Harris <ghar...@sonic.net> ---
(In reply to Sunil from comment #3)
> (In reply to Guy Harris from comment #2)
> Thanks for the reply. I've only worked with pod2man as of now. But I'll
> check the same with groff too.
groff isn't an alternative to pod2man. pod2man converts pod (Plain Old
Documentation) files to man page files; groff formats text, including (but not
limited to) man page text (it's the GNU implementation of the traditional UN*X
nroff/troff).
There's also mandoc:
https://mandoc.bsd.lv
which formats man page files. It's not as general as groff, which can be given
a set of *roff macro definitions to use to format files, with -man and -mdoc
being two of the macro packages that can be used; mandoc only knows how to
format -man and -mdoc documents.
> > It may be that there is no way to guarantee that arbitrary non-ASCII
> > characters can be formatted by arbitrary man page formatters (at a minimum,
> > it needs to deal with groff and mandoc; on traditional AT&T-derived UNIXes
> > they might still be using ditroff or even traditional nroff), in which case
> > that might be a difficult problem to solve by any means other than limiting
> > the characters allowed in the AUTHORS file, e.g. require Romanization of
> > names.
> In such case, can we use usernames
Usernames are subject to change over time; I've used both "guy" and "gharris"
at various times. A person might have different usernames on different
systems, too.
Names can change as well, but that's probably less likely to happen. The main
reason for name changes is probably marriage, if somebody takes their spouse's
family name.
We could, I guess, use *only* the email address, but it seems a bit more polite
to give a name if possible. A user might be better known by their name than by
their email address.
> instead of names which are formatted
> wrongly? As we already are using usernames too. 'dmistrycvet' looks better
> than a bunch of X's.
And a Romanization, such as "Dmitry Tsvettsikh", might be better than either of
them. Unfortunately, if the Wikipedia is to be believed:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanization_of_Cyrillic
there isn't a single standard for the Romanization of Cyrillic, and there
doesn't even appear to be a single standard for the Romanization of, for
example, Russian:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanization_of_Russian
The one I gave is the Google Translate Romanization, produced by pasting
"Дмитрий Цветцих" into the "from" box on Google Translate and translating to
English.
> Another small issue which can be seen in the screenshot sent by me is few
> names(like Eric Piel) are placed below usernames,
In the screenshot you attached, "Eric Piel" is to the left of
"<piel[AT]delmic.com>"; it's not below it, it's on the same line.
(By "usernames" you presumably mean "email addresses".)
> which should be placed above.
It shouldn't be below or above "<piel[AT]delmic.com>", it should be on the same
line as "<piel[AT]delmic.com>".
It's not aligned *horizontally* with other email addresses, but that's what I
assumed you were referring to when you said "incorrect spacing".
> I don't know how this went wrong. Could this be because those names
> were added late?
No, it couldn't. The order in which names are added affects the *vertical*
placement of the lines containing the name and email address; it doesn't affect
how the email address column is lined up.
It probably went wrong for the reason I gave, namely that "The spacing issues
*might* be due to the man page formatter in question not making as much of an
effort as possible to preserve spacing."
> May be. But they can be placed at correct place now.
What's the "correct place"? If you mean that the names aren't in alphabetical
order, that's true, but that's because we have not decided to *put* them in
alphabetical order.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via: Wireshark-bugs mailing list <wireshark-bugs@wireshark.org>
Archives: https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-bugs
Unsubscribe: https://www.wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-bugs
mailto:wireshark-bugs-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
