Martin Schroeder <[log in to unmask]> writes:

> On 2003-01-06 13:35:43 +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
> > Whether there will be a time when Omega is the engine of choice for
> > LaTeX3 or LaTeX4, will remain to be seen.  But e-TeX is here _now_
> > and LaTeX development needs to commence _now_.
>
> Is it really here _now_? Yes, web2c has it. But what about the
> non-web2c implementations (BaKoMa?) and the commercial
> distributors? None of the commercials seem to offer eTeX.
>
> Do you propose to make LaTeX eTeX-aware (i.e. use it's features
> when running eTeX and program without them in TeX [which would
> double the developement and maintenance]) or should it focus
> exclusively on eTeX?

We have a policy that distribution vendors have to have the "required"
stuff installed.  I propose that the LaTeX project declares a policy
that "latex" should be an e-TeX format, starting with the next release
of LaTeX, and that not using e-TeX as a LaTeX engine is obsolete
usage.  The core and required stuff at that time should, however,
still run with old TeX.  As of the next release after that, e-TeX
should be required to be the base for latex.  This is 1.5 years away,
and the commercial vendors will have had plenty of warning.  They are
free to use older versions of LaTeX if they insist on outdated
versions of TeX engines.

Just now e-OMEGA has been announced as available.  So the OMEGA
people will also have plenty of time to consolidate once the policy
is in the open.

As to LaTeX3 development: I say that any time spent trying to work
around misfeatures that e-TeX would cure is wasted.  If we put the
above scheme into place, e-TeX will be available by the time LaTeX3
gets into the shelves.

--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum