On Sat, 20 Sep 2008 17:17:23 +0930, Will Robertson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Great, this sounds like it will be a very useful package.
> Now I need to go over template with a fine tooth comb to make a proper
> comparison, since I haven't really used it at all yet.
I think that would be very useful. Obviously, Morten and Frank are familiar
with template, and I'm not too bad with various keyval packages, so it would
be useful for a third party to compare the approaches.
> Can I recommend that you start up a (say) GitHub repository[*] for
> this code to make it easier to (a) track changes in it, and (b) for
> *me* to be able to keep your code in sync with changes that we will
> end up making to the expl3 repository?
I'd be keen to know how others see this. My aim in quickly writing l3keys
was to provide a starting point for discussion here on how keys might be
managed in LaTeX3. Of course, you can only tell how well something works by
using it, but on the other hand I don't want to pre-empt the team's efforts
in this area. As this is not an official LaTeX3 package, I'm wary of making
it more generally accessible (certainly under the current working title).
However, if the team are happy for the code to be used as a basis for others
to experiment with, then I can make a more accessible release.
> Ideally, this will mean that when we do a big overhaul of the names
> and functions, we can include your files in the search/replace/tweak
> and just push the changes back to you.
I'm imagining that a lot of the core names are reaching a point of stability
(recent discussions on l3messages notwithstanding). Most things seem to
work quite well.